. >> rose: welcome to the program, in the historic election donald trump was elected president of the united states. we talk about the ramifications and implications with john dickerson, maureen dowd, dan balz, carl huse and lyonel barber. >> i think everyone took him less seriously than they should have because they thought of him simply as a reality tv star and a kind of a celebrity without any substance. but if fact, he has some very slewed instincts. i mean if you think will what he has done in this campaign, is he has taken down two dynasties in american politics. he first took down the bush dynasty, and now he's taking down the clinton dynasty. i mean that's an extraordinary thing to have done for somebody who had never run for office before. >> trump is more surprised than anyone to find himself where he

is. i'm sure he is just sitting up in trump tower with a-- what the heck. with roger ailes and all his-- circle of motly crew. and yeah, so i think he's more shocked than anyone. it was, as i said to you, like walking into a bank and expecting to find a lot of locked doors and guards and walking through. both in the primary and now. and it is really shocking to see the word's president-elect trump on trump's twitter feed. because in some ways he just seems more like a guy who would be selling reverse mortgages. >> rose: the trump election for the hour. funds for charlie rose is >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been 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. >> rose: in a stunning victory, donald trump has been elected the 45th president of the united states. trump defied poll predictions winning battleground states of florida, pennsylvania, ohio and north carolina. he spoke to his supporters at approximately three a.m. wednesday morning at a new york city rally after receiving a call from hillary clinton conceding the presidency. >> every single american will have the opportunity to realize his or her fullest po tengsz. the forgot enmen and women of our country, will be forgot enno longer. (cheers and applause) we are going to fix our inner

cities and rebuilt our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals. we're going to rebuild our infrastructure. which will become by the way, second to none. and we will put millions of our people to work as we rebuild it. >> rose: in an emotional speech clinton addressed the nation earlier this morning. >> this is painful, and st will be for a long time. but i want you to remember this. our campaign was never about one person or even one election. it was about the country we love. and about building an america that is hopeful, inclusive, and big hearted. we have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought. but i still believe in america and i always will. >> rose: president obama made

a statement from the white house calling on americans to unite. >> i have instructed my team to follow the example that president bush's team set eight years ago. and work as hard as we can to make sure that this is a successful transition for the president-elect. because we are now all rooting for his success, and uniting and leading the country. >> rose: republicans maintain control of the senate and the house of representatives. speaker of the house paul ryan also spoke to the country this morning. >> donald trump heard a voice out in this country that no one less else heard. he connected in ways with people no one else did. he turned 308 particulars on its head. and now-- politics on its heads and now donald trump will lead a unified republican government. >> rose: trump's selection has sent shock waves around the world highlighting the populist tied sweeping the globe. financial markets dropped sharply overnight but regained some ground by the morning.

joining me now from washington, dan balz from "the washington post," carl hughese-- huse from the new york sometimes, john dickerson of "face the nation," and here in new york, maureen dowd of "the new york times." joining us late certificate lyonel barber of "the financial times." i'm pleased to have all of them on this program. dan, tell me how he did it? did he as speaker o ryne said hear voices that no one else heard? >> he certainly did, charlie. i mean i think we have to give him a lot of credit. he started out this campaign with a very clear and simple message that talked about the state of the country, talked about immigration, talked about national identity in ways that most candidates, most politicians were not willing to talk about. and he found and had an instinct that there was an audience out in america that was hungering for that kind of-- that kind of message. you know, there are a lot of people who feel as though the political elites have abandoned

them and looked down on them, who feel that the federal government has done nothing for them and who think that washington doesn't work. and he understood that better than all of the experts did. and he built a movement that turned out in bigger numbers on tuesday than anybody had predicted. >> rose: john dickerson, how was he able to address them in a way that resonated with them better than anybody else. cuz everybody, including hillary clinton knew that the middle class in america was upset, that the middle class in america did not believe that their life was as good as it had been and that the life for their children would not be as good as it was for them. >> that's right. well he talked not too them but for them. and i think that was the key, is that he made a gut level emotional connection to those voters who felt they had been ignored and betrayed, betrayal being a big part of it. and he, he-- he got them. he understood them and we know it's funny. i was about to say we know this

about politics. and after this campaign, i think that kind of a sentence has to probably be banished. but we think we know that candidates make a connection with voters when it's a very strong connection when it's emotional. and once a voter grants a politician that emotional connection, they're willing to forgive them a bunch of things and they sort of, they believe them on a whole other rang of issues without necessarily having to hear the details of it. and that bond that he made which was emotional, was a very strong one. hillary clinton talked a great deal about the middle class, not only explaining how she understood what they were going through but then offering a series of detailed plans from the minute she announced her candidacy on how to mix the various challenges that people in the middle class faced. she was not unattentive to this, but it was a different relationship with the voter than the one that donald trump had with his base. >> rose: carl? >> well, i would say that he was able to really play on his outsider status, right.

that resonated with people. hillary is the ultimate insider to a lot of americans, when trump would say, you know, she had experience, it's all the bad kind. one thing that stuck out to me was in the senate races, you had efan bye, russ fine gold, two big names in politics running for their 08d seats, totally expected to win and were thoroughly rejected. i think that shows that trump has tapped into this idea. people want something new here. they don't want to try the same old stuff. and it worked for him. >> i was also truck, maureen, i'm bringing this up now. the idea that he described what he was about as a movement. not that he created it it. >> right, well, he is an egotis and he really enjoyed being out there talking to the crowd and feeding off the energy of the crowd. in a way it is similar to bill clinton where they had a hard time getting him off stage, and as the greats may hagerman of "the new york times" today, hillary on the other handmade it

clear she didn't like campaigning. she was just kind of telephoning her foot. and the sub text of her campaign wasn't a great vision, it was it's my turn, damn it. so that's not an attractive vision. >> rose: okay. lionel barber has joined us, i think. lionel, how did it look from europe and from london? >> you know t it was a whole metropolitan, the press, the media, they wrote off the euro scept particulars. they never said britan would leave the eu and similarly people never predicted or hardly ever predicted ta donald trump, a real estate mogul with no experience in government whatsoever, no policies to speak of, we done know who his team is, and yet he can bin the-- win the white house and absolutely stump hillary clinton, the ultimate establishment candidate. and the reason, and many of your commentators have put their finning are on it is that he had a really clever slogan, simple, stripped down, change, we want

to make america great which appeals both to people who feel that they have been left behind, marginalized, by globalization. but also appealing to a kind of culture nostalgia about a better america, a nonpc america, and boy, you know, it wasn't just noncollege degrees that turned out for trump. there were many others, educated, people above 70,000 dollars a year. and you know, his movement, we have now got to see, of course, whether he can translate this anger and frustration into concrete policies of change working with congress within the constitution, within the separation of powers to achieve the kind of change that ronald reagan did in 1980 onward. >> he made a lot of mistakes. he said things that we thought would be unpardonable by the electorate. you quoted maureen glitdo in a piece today who wrote the press takes trump literally, but not

seriously. his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. >> yeah, i think his supporters decided that it takes a thief to catch a threaf. so they were willing to forgive a lot. and you know, the question all along was did they want to use trump, even though they knew he was a very flawed quan dat, as a baseball bat to smash washington apart. we just didn't know how many people wanted to do that. >> well, i think that's-- maureen is right about his core support. i think one of the things that was an open question and now has been solved, is that that was what won him the primary when he was in a crowded field with a bunch of different people. but then the question was when he got into the general election, how many of those republican was don't participate in the prime ar or if they did, they participated with one of the 16 other candidates, how many would follow to him just because he wore the red jerszee, in other words, he was just a republican. and it turns out a lot of them did.

and particularly in the late periods, they came back to him after expressing some skepticism. it's that difference between his core group and then those who are republicans and in a polarized electorate, and particularly when you have hillary clinton as the opponent and you have the historical situation where you would have had three democratic terms in a row, which is only been done once since 1947. you had a situation in which a lot of those voters may not have siendz up for the whole explode the system in washingtonment but were just signing up as good old republicans. and determining the size of both parties is one of the things that will be-- that is one of the tricks about figuring out exactly what his coalition is. because i don't think all 60 million are on for, you know, sort of shaking up washington at the level, some of them are. which is to basically shake it up really right down to the

foundation. >> i was just going to add this, my colleague phil rucker and i spent most of the last two weeks of the campaign doing very deep interviews with about 50 people, most of them inside the two campaigns and some who were close to the campaigns, for an oral history project that we just published at the post. and one of the most important things that came out of those interviews was described by mandi grunwald who was one of the senior advisors. and she said they knew that this was a change election. that there was a hunger for change in the electorate and they knew that that was a huge problem for hillary clinton, because she could never be the change candidate. and they prepared a strategy that was designed to raised risk factor. what they wanted to do was make people believe that its risk of electing donald trump was greater than the benefit of the change that he might bring. and their hope was that on election day their view of that question would prevail over his view of the question.

and clearly, they were wrong. >> yeah, i think what we saw was that there was way more people that we thought that were willing to roll the dice on donald rump. >> rose: yeah, roll the dice. >> and go for change in washington. if you want to shake up washington, just walk around the streets today and people have this stunned look on their face. they're giving out free hugs in the park. so the republicans, were surprised at the results as we were. talking to republicans friday night, they expected to lose the senate. they expected trump to lose. today they're waking up and they've got unified government and they're happy but they're also like well, now we have to deliver it, right. this is their big chance. and i think that where we go from here is going to take some sorting out. but donald trump and the republicans in congress aren't on the same page on a lot of issues. you know, they want to work on certain things but they're going to have some problems to work out, including, you know, his relationship with paul ryan.

mr. ryan said though in his remark there today that everything is great. >> let me jump in here to just give a bit of a perspective from outside. i know that we in europe, and the japan, allies, we don't have a vote, we didn't have a vote in this election. but we certainly didn't sign up to donald trump's foreign policy agenda. and if he means even half of what he says, the world is going to be in for a very, very rough ride. i mean i start with repudiating the iran nuclear deal. the words he said about the nato alliance, loose words about maybe jam an-- japan and south korea could go nuclear in response to the security problems with china in asia. and i could go on. and this is a huge question for america's place in the world. is america going to turn back on essentially the post world order and put america first in such a way that the traditional

alliance system phrase, this at a moment of great peril for the world, as china rises, the middle east is looking at just a shattered system. so some very, very big questions being asked in paris, in london, in tokyo. and just lastly, does this mean we get maureen la pen in france, you got to tell me. >> i think we will spend the next few months trying to figure out how much of what mr. trump said, he tallly meant. he laid out an ambitious agenda on what he will do immediately, we're already talking about repealing the 45e89 care bill. as maureen knows, going through this campaign, is he responding to the crowd or does he really mean this stuff. and his speech last night was pretty conciliatory. so there is still some things to uncover about the trump agenda. >> did he mean what he said or was it simply about the end justifies the means. >> i think, yes, and i think will mean what he says the

minute he says it, even if it contradicts what he said during the campaign when he becomes president. i think that's one of his skills. is that he is constantly changing and yet comes across as if he, is constantly held that position his whole life. one of the things that was interested in paul ryan's news conference today was not only that the man who said he wouldn't campaign or defend donald trump couldn't stop mentioning his name and when he heralded the new voices that donald trump heard, he didn't mention that those voices are the ones that were calling for his head, paul ryan's head. and think that he is a cappity later and a sellout for the party's principles. and so but what you saw there was the speaker rushing to embrace donald trump. that is smart politics. and also he believes that for example, on health care, there is legislation that they had sent to president obama and president obama vetoed.

this is the story paul ryan told today. and what was his expectation is that legislation is there, send it on up to president trump, he'll sign it. and we'll move on. so check one item off the list of promises which is repealing and replacing obama care. that is in talking to members of congress over the last several months of republicans who were nervous but supporting donald trump. what gave them hope was that paul ryan's plan and his agenda was something that he could put just in front of donald trump and donald trump who would want to have achievements and accomplishment was basically sign on to it. >> rose: dan balz, you said as i referred earlier, what kind of president will he be and what kind of country will he lead. the oval office, they say, is a sobering place for the person who steps in there. and feels the full weight of leading the country. it is likely that at least in some way donald trump will be influenced by that. yes? >> i think we all believe that

that is likely to be the case. and he will be surrounded by at least in part by people who will be urging him to do that just as they were urging him in the final weeks of the campaign to be more disciplined as he expressed on the campaign trail, take it easy, donald, be careful, donald. and so there will be a lot of pressure on him to do that. but everything we witnessed during the campaign is that he doesn't always listen to the people around him. that he does what he wants to do and he says what he wants to say at opportune moments. a lot of his agenda will be fu ng i believe or flexible, as john said, one thing he says today won't be necessarily what he said the day before. i do think there-- that there are a couple of core things about him. one of them obviously is trade. and i think one of the things that he was able to do in this campaign, and lionel touched on this in terms of what this means for the future, and the brexit comparison.

in some ways, the issue of globalization and trade has been defined by the elites which is that yes, there are winners and losers. but on balance it is good for countries and good for the world. i think donald trump turned that on its head which is to say yes, there were winners and losers and the losers have not gotten enough attention and we have gien to much to the winners. i done know what he has in terms of the agenda to deal with that. i think that because he feels so strongly and has talked not just through the campaign but for many years about the trade issue that that will in one way or another become essential to what he does. >> maureen, my impression is that we understood he had his finger on something. we saw the rallies. the response he got. we just didn't believe that they were as large a group as we now see in the election. >> right. well, i think that trump is more surprised than anyone to find himself where he is. i am sure he is just sitting up

in trump tower with the chief broker, what the heck, with roger ailes and all his-- circle of motly crew. and country yeah, so i think he's moore shocked than anyone. it was, as i said to you, like walking into a bank and expecting to find a lot of locked doors and guards, and walking through, both in the primary and now. and it is really shocking to see the words president-elect trump on trump's twitter feed. kz in some ways he just seems more like a guy who would be selling reverse mortgages, you know? and now he's leader of the free world. >> rose: let me ask all of you about the press and institutions, people who do polling. did everybody get it wrong or in fact, did we see this coming, and just did not see the full extent of it?

john? >> well, let's see, you know, so in terms of what i-- i will speak for myself, just-- anyway anybody who has covered republican politics since the buchanan campaign knows that this group of grass roots corn serve tifs exists and has been disappointed by the cappity late-- cappitylation of the elites in the party. and we have seen it in different candidacy, we saw it certainly in the tea party movement. so we knew it was out there. what surprised me was that in all the conversations over the many years i have had with grass roots conservatives who felt this way, the number one trait that they picked of the politics-- politicians that they did not like was they changed their minds when they came to washington. that they seemed to bend and weren't-- they didn't stay true. well, soo it was surprising to me that donald trump would become the champion, given how many positions he had changed, how recently he was a republican, and that he didn't seem to have that kind of deep in his bones feeling about some

of the issues that gration roots conservatives did. that's for me where i was cut unawares. i think in terms of the polling, there will be allots of analysis. i think one of the things that people miss, i dobts think they miss the shy trump voter. the polls as i looked at them in terms of that noncollege white voter, they got those. they got that. i think what happened was in the waiting when they tried to take the polling that they did and then weight it in order to be a representative sample of the electorate. they thought they wouldn't turn out in the numbers that they did. they new the margin, they didn't know the turnout. so that is one of my guesses about why this was wrong in some states like pennsylvania, wisconsin, ohio where, you know, the polls had him about one point, and then i think he has won by eight in ohio. so that is pie guess. but it is just preliminary. >> i think the problem with the media, and i speak guardedly here, is that we're often too

attached to orthodoxy. so we just assumed that it was quite right that the latino was vote overwhelmingly against trump and you could not win a general election, presidential election based on disaffected white male voters, or seen just white voters and that has been turned on its head. i think what dan was saying about free trade, similarly, we've all believed that globalization is basically good for everybody. it comes out in the wash. wrong, people just don't feel that. and i think lastly, on economic policy, it's very interesting how the trump camp has attacked the fed for its ultra low-interest rate policy. you are going to see much greater attachment to fises kal policy in the new trump administration. and again, that's not what orthodoxy has been about. so i think we've got to look a little bit harder at ourselves, in the mirror. >> dan, you said trump's policy-- proposals lack real

specificity but then his ampaign was not about policy wide papers it was, instead, a thumb in the eye of the establishment, an american version of the populist uprising against open borders and globalizations that has been seen in other western societies. >> and it seems to me, and i'm asking this as a question, that trump's personality is reality television experience maids him a unique candidate to do that. >> oh, i think that's absolutely right. and you know, when he got into the race, i think everybody took him less seriously than they should have. because they thought of him as simply a rereality tv star and a kind of a celeb rid without any substance. but in fact, you know, he has-- he has some very shrewd instincts. if you think about what he has done in this campaign, is he has taken down two dynasties in american politics. he first toork down the bush dynasty and now he's taken down the klein ton dynasty, that's an

extraordinary thing to have done for somebody who has never run for office before. and so again, his appeal was, i mean, this was a campaign, i wrote this, this was a campaign about elemental and fundamental issues about without we are as a people. and trump seemed to understand the unrest in the country better than certainly better than his opponents and better than a lot of the people who were covering the campaign. i means i was over in britan for brexit and remember that night as, you could see the, you know, you could see the country suddenly come to terms with the idea that the vote was going to turn out in a way that no one had expected. and you could feel that last night as they races were much closer early on than people thought. and then as it became clear that clinton's path rather than trump's was narrower and narrower and narrower to try to get to 270 until finally there wasn't any path left for her. >> rose: but lionel, the comparison to brexit, do they have a real similarity in.

>> well, i think this is actually, if anything, more serious than brexit as a political phenomenon. because remember, brexit was a referendum, where, you know, it's basically up or down. here you have a general election, with an electoral college. you've got to win a give ennumber of votes, and he won stunningly. and again, what dan said, he went not just through one vote, but he went through the republican primaries, against state governors with serious experience. so the impact of this, given the most powerful country on earth, and america still is the most powerful political, military, and economic force on earth has voted for somebody with a huge question mark about what he is going to do, what his style will be, where there are big questions about his temperment, well reported in the press, and just to go back to what was said earlier b what happens to you in

the white house. i look forward to the senior economic or the senior advisor who said to president trump, no. and gets away with it. so you know, this is-- this is bigger than brexit. brexit was pretty big, future of europe, but this is big. >> rose: john. >> one thing about brexit, what donald trump did is amazing and phenomenal as a political act. but the brexit analogy falls done a little bit. hillary clinton would have loved if it was a referendum because she is ahead in the popular vote. and if she says there, she would have won. so the idea of the brexit analogy, is both a a surprise to the elites who didn't see it coming, so that holds for sure. but the idea of an up or down vote, and the one who is the most popular among the people, and the people's voice picking the most popular person out there, if that were the case, donald trump wouldn't be president. >> you know, trump is going to get a chance to look at the white house tomorrow, president

obama has invited him over there. i would love to be at that meeting between the birthee and the birther, right? they've had such a tortured relationship. obama's statement today was very gracious but you know this is just agonizing for him. there's a chance that so much of his legacy is going to be wiped away. they're suffering over there in the white house, seeing what is going on. so that is going to be quite the session. >> rose: when you say wipe a what his legacy, meaning that if he can, that the republicans have the power now to dismantle the iran nuclear deal, the republicans have the power now to dismantle obamacare and o oba care has lots of critics because we've seen the rise in premium and some other considerations about it, but that is packly what we should look forward to, and so therefore all the things that barack obama took great pride in, will be abolished. >> and climate change, the treateddees on climate change,

immigration, his executive orders, on many things. one of the things trump has promised to do is to undo, repeal, the executive orders over there. so i think this is painful at the white house. now there are parts of the president's-- president's legacy that can't be removed. he got us out of the financial crisis, advances on gay rights. but i do think that they see this as a real threat to what they have spent eight years putting together. >> the clinton dine see, the bush dynasty, donald trump has defeated bother. is this the end of the the clinton bien stee what happens now to bill clinton and hillry clinton. >> well, you know, i agree with dan, i think that must have been incred-- incredibly painful for the two president bushes to put out their congratulation statements today to donald trump, given how he has talked about that family. and the first president bush played-- the first president bush made his feeling to my clear about donald trump in

2011, with one epithet, one choice epithet. but i think, you know, it's interesting. because president obama was elected in this revolutionary fer ver to move past the clirn ton machine. dpsh-- clinton machine. and i think at that point n2008, we thought the machine was over. but then show president obama lead us back to that, you know. he sort of pushed aside joe bied en, he could have gone, lent his support to him. >> he charged and supported joe biden. >> right, but instead he chose hillary. i don't know if he felt guilty that he had you surped her or he joined her in ivy league elitism but he sorted of mislead the mood of the country which is amazing for such a brilliant politician. >> let me ask you this point, because many people have said ta donald trump-- hillary clinton is the only person donald trump could have defeated and they also would make the point that donald trump was the only person that hillary clinton could have defeated which turns out not to be true.

but is-- could joe biden have beaten donald trump. has donald trump simply found the one flawed candidate he was most likely to defeat or that is giving him too little credit, john? >> i think that might be giving him too little credit. i mean it's the-- the problem is that you never know-- people when they put joe biden forward, they think of, you know, joe biden from scranton and he has this connection with working class voters and-- but and that's all true. that's all part of his amazing personality. but they don't think about the withering attacks over the course of you know, a year and a half from donald trump who one of donald trump's great traits is to create chaos because then he can be the master of the chaos. and joe biden as a frod of the senate and of washington is not a-- that's not 4eus turf. chaos is not his turf.

and the same is true with bernie sanders. people last night were saying you think bernie sanders would have lost those rust belt states? perhaps not. but also we don't really know what it would have looked like to have somebody who is an independent socialist be attacked by donald trump for a year or so. and what that would have done to a candidacy like that. so i think donald trump was, and is a pretty talentedded politician. and it would have been hard for anybody. >> dan balz, will he build the wall? >> he'll try to build the wall. will come to the conclusion, i suspect, that you don't necessarily have to build the entire wall. >> rose: it can only shall a block long, its he a wall, he built a wall. >> he will try to build the wall. but i think in many ways it's the rhetorical wall that he will build about what this country is and who we are open to and who we are not that is the more

important aspect. i mean he can build a wall or not on the u.s. mexican border but the degree to which the united states is an open country and a tolerant country or a closed country and a suspicious country, i think is what we're waiting it see in terms of the definition of a president trump as opposed to candidate trump. >> i think there are four words that define donald trump and maybe his presidency, which is actually five, the art of the deal. he's a deal maker. this is not val yous driven. they are maybe in broad terms. he is guy that can cut the deal. i completely agree, this will not be-- the wall in arizona, texas, will be a lot shorter than the great wall of china. they may be something. and the mexicans are already, mexican president is already reaching out to donald trump saying oh, i've got to meet you. maybe we can talk about this immigration problem. i just made one prediction, charlie, dealing with the chinese is going to be a whole lot harder. >> rose: because?

>> because when donald trump talks about free trade and that americans are basically losing out to china and there is a massive trade surplus that needs to be reversed, actually doing that in real terms, changek a trade surplus, reducing it sharply without a massive, say, depreesh yaition of the dollar, it's really difficult. that, and britain-- in broader terms managing china's rise in asia, that is not something that can be done in four words. >> you know, speaking of the art of the deal, the republicans are he beul yant today, they're got a republican president but there is still some unease. they're not really sure of trump. they don't know for sure if he is a fiscal conservative. he's thrown some expensive programs out there. he wants to make deals. i noticed that he called chuck schumer who is going to be the if you democratic leader. new york has contacts with trump from the past.

chuck sheum certificate a deal maker too. so you know, it will be interesting to see if those guys can getting to. this might not play out exactly how the republicans anticipate it playing out. >> well, in fact, his friends have said on this program, donald trump's friends have said on this program that for him, whatever he says is simply first offer. that he is, in fact, a deal maker. that he is simply laying out what, as any real estate negotiator would do, this is what i would like to have knowing that is not what i am going to get. >> right. >> very interesting given what president putin has said, just today, early message of congratulations, question, could you actually isolate one or two problems in that relationship like syria, and try to do a deal. one of an-- an early test. >> you know, one thing from the paul ryan press conference we talked about earlier, he also mentioned the name mike pence quite a bit, pie good friend mike pence. i think you're going to see mike

pence playing a really big role in dealing with the hill. he's been up there. he knows something about it. certainly more than president-elect trump knows about it. nd and i think paul ryan is also counting on mike pence, his good friend to protect him a little bit from donald trump. >> rose: i absolutely think that's true. go ahead, john. >> i also-- we may very well see an entirely new kind of management structure in a white house too based on the conversations that donald trump has had with leaders on the hill. he's interested in a couple of things. he's centered in kind of a big result. and then the rest of it he wants basically people to deal with. >> you clean up the details there, would you mike, take care of that. >> yes, exactly. carl mentioned, on the fiscal question, yeah, you don't want to get a cbo score for donald trump's plans because remember, you know, at least the things he said in the campaign, is he not going to touch social security or medicare. is he going to cut taxes

considerably, he will increase infrastructure sphending and he did at least at one point believe everybody should be covered by health care. universal health care and. >> right, exactly, and daycare and family leave as well. so that's not going to-- that's not going to make it through the budget committee let alone get a score that anybody would be satisfied with. but that's also, you know, a part of the gap between what he talks about and then what is possible. and he will, you know, he will just work to get ta deal show. >> i wanted to come back to domestic politics for just a second. you know, the democrats have now won, assuming that hillary clinton does win the popular vote, she's ahead now, they will have won the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections. and yet they come out of this election without the white house, without the white house, without the senate, with out most of the governorship's and state legislatures in this country. this is now a republican-run

country, from top to bottom. and it leaves the democrats in a quandary. they believe that they have a coalition, a rising colix of a new america. and the popular vote would suggest they're right. but in one way or another, they have a party that's been hallowed out over the obama administration. i mean they suffered huge losses in 2010. in 2014, and now they've had this stunning loss of the white house in 2016. so the question is how does the democratic party regroup and rebuild in order to take advantage of what they assume are the demographic movements in this country, in order to become a governing party again. >> within thing that concerns some people is whether he has does his victory show bring respect to the most extreme followers of some from the at right? >> i think that's a very central

question. you know, in talking about the demographic and cultural change that the country is going through, this is a serious debate about who we are as a people. and in its best sense, you can have ta debate in a civil way but what we saw in this campaign was that the joining of those issues gave rise to racism and anti-semitism and misogyny and religious and relj us bigotry. and you know, donald trump is in the vor text of that. and as president, he's in a much different position than he was as a candidate. so this is a debate that hasn't been fully resolved. and donald trump is going to be the agent for in one way or another moving that discussion forward. and the question is how does he plan to do that. >> you understand where culture and politics intersect. what do you make of this? >> donald trump was, it looked like three ticks away from losing his brand. he vanga will lose her brand and that he would be going around

making speeches to white supremacists, you know, groups. but instead, he's the president-elect. so i don't think any of us know. and also he has played a lot of different characters in his career, he has played the apprentice boss, who was very ju di shus. he played the prot gee to george stein brenner and roy cone so. so he, you know, as these guys have said, he doesn't have any value system except winning. so it remaining to be seen what he thinks winning in this case is. >> the. >> rose: the other thing that strikes me, and i mean this for all of you, that this was a singular victory for donald 2ru6r7. he at every stage of this campaign, he was the one who made the decision. the candidate made the decisions. he was not as i think secretary clinton was more often, the product of a committee or the product of a campaign staff. at every turn you would ask them, who does elise into. and they would always say elise

ins to himself. he was making all the decisions about his campaign. >> but i think that's incredibly important to factor in as we assess what kind of president he will be. because clearly, he can't do that when he's in the white house. but he will say to himself, apart from saying look at those crowds, he will say, you know, i was right. they told me after the convention in cleveland that i had to pivot to the center. they had-- they told me i had to be responsible trump. they told me not to go offer message. well, i disbts and i won and i didn't just win, i won convincingly. so the really big question now is how far can he pivot from candidate to governor, to president. and i think i want to pick up something that was said earlier which is very, very important. is we may be looking at a new managerial style. of course will you have the showmanship but people are saying to me, as they have said

to others, that vice president mike pence will be an absolutely critical player, not just in helping donald trump with appointments, but also building bridges to congress. so you may see a slightly different kind of presidential style, a management, and team building, it will be interesting to watch. >> rose: go ahead. >> the one thing i would say about the trump running his own campaign. i know there is a lot of consultants and political strategists who hope he was a singular candidate because they might be out of business. other people are going to look and go wow, can i do this myself. i don't need all you guys, so we will have to see. >> what i wonder is that it's certainly the case of those people around him, the rnc and some of his closest advisors that they think this last stage between the third debate and the end, that he did well and that they saw movement in the polls because he was put on the tel

prompter, as they say, and that he stayed on message. and that he accepted some of the constraints of the campaign, and that that really paid off for him. and that's why you heard him say outloud, you know, stay on message, donald, which is a parra phrase, and the extent to which he took that on. why does that matter? because there are obviously lots of constraints in a white house. and you have to stay within the boundaries of the office in certain instances. the whole promise of the trump presidency is that he won't. that he will be disruptsive, break through the stuff that clogs up washington. so what he may have learned in that last stage of the campaign about discipline, will be fascinating to watch, as he takes on a job where a whole lot more discipline is required. >> charlie, i think one of the interesting thing is that when he seemed to do best in the debates, when he had his best moments, and in the later stages of the campaign, as john said, when he was tethered to the tel prompter, he was very much more

a again erich republican, a reform minded republic but a again erich republican. and yet we know that the pan date that he sought and received is to come in and you know, totally shake up washington, to change the system, to make the system work for people who feel it hasn't worked for them. those are, in some ways, in conflict with one another. and he's going 20 have to figure out, and perhaps he has begun to figure out how you balance those two. he certainly did it in a way that has now gotten him to become president-elect. but you know, it's one thing to do it for two or three or four weeks. it is another thing to do it for two or three or four years. >> i'm old enough to remember the kind of people john kennedy attracted to washington in 1960. and other times ronald reagan attracted a group of people from the conservative wing of the movement wing of the republican party. what kind of people will he attract to govern? >> haven't we already seen some

of those examples? >> carl, what kind? >> well, i mean rudy giuliani, newt gingrich, you know, jeff sessions is interesting, he has been his point man up in the senate, capitol hill. you know, one of the things we were talking about now is who actually will he attract to the government because as dan knows, we've got to start figuring that out. so interesting question. i can't really say but i do expect to see more of rudy, newt and chris christie. >> you know one thing that he did in his campaign, the campaign was both a message against the elite but then also form followed message in the sense that he had a data group that was more out of the consumer marketing wing of the world than the ground game kienld of political science wing of the world. and it turns out the marketing guys knew a thing or two. so what will be fascinating to

watch is the extent to which he is able to bring new voices, new ideas to the kalsified business of government. and that is a promise and a hope of the trump presidency. the downside, of course s that all presidents have to worry about getting into a cocoon and having people around you who just tell you what you want to hear. that is a problem with the office. and dn ald trump in his world, somebody mentioned earlier, the first economist who has to tell him no, maybe it it was lionel, when people have to start telling him no, how does that work out. and or does the cocooning function keep him protected from adverse views which often end if bad problems, and back to your kennedy analogy, charlie. the problem is the decisions in the bay of the pigs, bay of pigs just kind of carried on on their own course. in part because they were cooked before he got there. but the classic example of group

think, what's that going to look like in i a trump presidency. >> rose: it was also a teaching moment for john kennedy. >> the best teaching moment about group think, the problem is, you know, sometimes that near-miss learning can, you can have a big problem while you're learning the useful lessons. >> do you envision-- i was just going to say, do you envision the best coming out of this, the best and the trumpiest, when you see who comes in here. >> it it will be the tremendous and the brightest. >> yeah. >> i think it's very important to find out who is going to be advising you dong ald trump, i spoke, because its whole generation of foreign policy, so called experts wrote themselves out of the script when they denounced donald trump several months ago, as a republican candidate. >> there's finally this for me. the nasdaqiness that he expressed towards secretary clinton, you know, saying she

was guilty and she was crooked and she ought to be in jail. and he was going to appoint a prosecutor if he was elected president. does anybody think he will really friday to do that? >> well, he said the nation owed hiltry clinton a debt of gratitude last night which seemed obviously a hard thing to say if you were planning to then go and prosecute her. i think, and that is, you know, i'm being cute, but there is a tension there. and if-- whatever inspired him to give that conciliatory speech which was-- which struck at least a right pitch, a right enough pitch that the president referred to it in his remarks and said that he liked what he heard, and mitt romney has now said he hopes that that is how trump will govern, whatever inspired that speech, would probably, you would imagine, inspire trump and his innercircle to decide not to go

after both hillary clinton, the dozen or so accusers, "the new york times" and the list of other groups that he was going to sue or take legal action against. >> i think it's bluster. i would be amazed given that speevment i think it was very well crafted and thought odd. and i think the fact is, donald trump does not play by the marcus or queensby rules but it is going to be slightly different when he gets in the white house. so to have some vin dik tiff campaign, a la stalin, circumstancea 1-9d 31, i don't think it's going to happen. but i'm out on a limb there, charlie. >> this question from maureen and then anybody, because i think it's an important question. without do we think influenced him on the speech that he maie last night? was it family, was it simply him alone. or is there, you know, someone. >> charlie, i don't know the

answer to that. but i think that the team around him has been writing those speeches that he has been ading on the tel prompter for weeks. i was told earlier this week that stephen miller, one of his policy people has been very, very important in the words that have come out of, or that have been put up on the tel prompter. i don't know if he was the word smith on the speech last night. trump does some noodling with the speeches, but i think a lot of those words have been written for him, for particular audiences, and particular moments. >> and what roll does steve bannon play? >> . >> i have no idea. >> here, let me just throw out, we know in the administration and in president sees, that there say kind of innercircle political and in the old rangement, you have your, you know, your atwater go over to the rnc or karl rove or you have david axelrod. the person who maintains the

president's political brief. and there's often a lot of sloshing around between what's policy and the role of the president and what meetings the political advisor sits in. and that will be really, really interesting. because tending that plilt kal base-- political base will be quite important because you can imagine that will give donald trump a lot of power dealing with congress. >> you also wonder whether this whole idea of the speculation about a television network, whether that can still be a real idea on the part of jared kushner, his son in law. >> yeah, he's been talking to banks about it but i think they have bigger fish to fry now. but i think one thing, you know, i agree with lionel, i think it's funny because trump might think of pence, and the white house in general as a licensing deal. like he does with his steaks and wine. where he, you know, he is going to license it. >> yeah. >> and mike pence is going to do all the work. but also i think another really interesting thing to watch will be flattery.

we've seen how vulnerable he ask with hillary and her team of psychologists and the debate, to you know, goading and flattery and with putin, all it took was one compliment to change the entire republican party starns toward the evil empire. so i get all over washington from mitch mcconnell to chuck schumer, people are, you know, working with their own psychologists to try and figure out how to flatter him and get their way. >> do you relish covering donald trump? as a columnist that you are, because of all the-- all the personality that is there, that you can find all kinds of cultural metaphors? >> yes. yes, and he, you know, likes me so much he tweeted that i was a wacky neur otic dope. so i didn't think it's going to be a j. >> you are phone pals aren't you? >> not any more, no, no. >> rose: after you wrote what

you wrote, he said no morks he doesn't take your calls any more. >> no, he thinks i'm being mean to him. he's very sensitive. he can insult people, but then he himself is very sensitive. >> rose: it is an extraordinary story. i mean all of us know that it it was historic last night as we watched these things come in. and moses of the questions remain. we've talked about many of them today. but those are the questions that remain. because the hard part begins now, putting together a government and finding out what is possible and not possible. and coming face to face, knowing that you are responsible, for the challenges that the country faces. i think that's a sobering impact. and i don't think anybody can escape what ta does to someone, knowing that you are responsible. and you have are spobilityd for the national security of the country, but responsible for so many other things having to do with the country that you love.

and i think everybody knows that anybody who reaches the levels that trump and hillary clinton have reached, you know, are patriots, and care about the country. the question is how that caring is expressed and what are the limits and the inspiration for it. thank each of you for joining me. i know this has been a long session, a long night. and i thank you for taking time today to be here. thanks very much. >> 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.

the following kqed production was produced in high definition. ♪ ♪ ♪ every single bite needed to be great. >> twinkies in there. >> wow! >> it's like a great, big hug in the whole city. >> that food is about all i can handle. my parents put chili powder in my baby food. >> french fries everywhere, all over the table and just a lot of chili.