>> from washington, "the mclaughlin group," the american original. for over three decades, the sharpest minds, best sources, hardest talk. john: issue one -- deadline day for a.c.a. his sunday -- january 31st -- is the 2016 deadline for buying personal health insurance under the affordable care act, also known as a.c.a. or obamacare. and also note this -- if you dont qualify for an exemption, our failure to buy insurance may result in a fine of $695 or

a 2.5% tax on your income whichever is higher! and as the clock ticks, 10.5 million americans still dont have health care coverage. why have over 10 million americans failed to purchase obamacare insurance? pat buchanan? pat: one reason is they don't want to spend their money that way. they prefer to keep it, which is why you've got fines, which is why you've got money taken out oaf their pay and they're being clubbed into buying health care that they don't want right now because some of them are probably 21 and they're going to live forever. the real question here is what happens in election. if hillary clinton or any democrat is elected, obamacare is forever. but if donald trump or one of these republicans is elected, there's going to be some real eform and this subject will be

mooted. john: the penalty of avoiding health insurance -- pat: that went right to the supreme court and some of us disagree whether you can fine people and tax people for not buying a product they don't want. eleanor: john, i want to thank you for doing a public service and leading with in issue sosome people don't realize this deadline is looming. 10 million people is a pretty small percentage. some of them are survivalists, as pat says. some of them are young people who think that they can avoid any kind of accident but one of them get hit by a bus or motorcycle and ends up in the emergency room, do we really want to be paying for that? people need to carry their load in a shared pool of conch. so i think the republicans -- coverage. i think the republicans, every one of them is against the a.c.a. but none of them have

come up with a plan that can replace it. whether it's a republican or democrat elected, obamacare is here to stay. jackie: thank you for the clarification. and thank you for your point. i'm sure it wasn't easy for you. what's the story, tom? tom: i love your tie. but beyond that -- john: made in china. point of view tony: trump would like it. i should be paying more than i'm paying because i was born with a heart defect. a lot of my contemporaries, young people >> paying far more than they should be paying and it's grossly unfair that they're having to carry the load of society more than they should be. there could be cost deductions and coston creases for people who are older, i'm afraid. one of the issues with obamacare is when it gets to this point

where the penalties are going to have to keep having to rise up because of health care inflation costs, it's going to perpetuate and people are eventually going to get to the point and say season -- listen, i am paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars on this inflationary curve that never seems to end. let's go for something different. clarence: once you perceive that health care costs are going up for obamacare. they'd still be going up even without obamacare. obamacare has slowed the effects of inflation. tom: i would say that has much more to do with the economy. offensive i also be -- eleanor: also, the young people will get theirs when they get old. it all works out in the end. we take care of 50e67 other. clarence: i talk to my son again and again because he is paying

more -- that's the way insurance works. it's not a free program, despite what pat is trying to tell us. it never was intended to be. pat: i think that deficit is going to continue to rise. john: on its present trajectory is obamacare financially sustainable? pat: i think it's going to run a deficit and add to the debt continually. eleanor: i think it's sustainable. all the cost investigations in the house show that it lowers the deficit and they're changing from -- service where people are getting different kinds of care. the whole health system is changing. urgent camp centers. i think we're figuring this out and it's going to be fine and i'm sure pat would like medicare for all, which is what bernie sanders wants and that -- i think that would be terrific but there's no way to accomplish that politically.

pat: let me go back -- i did not mean that. tom: the economic factors, you see a lot of big, major health insurance companies pulling out of the system or threatening to because they don't see the potential to do revenue eck librium on it. one positive is that conservatives will be forced to articulate more than tort reform as a solution to the health care crisis and i suppose the president deserves credit for that. clarence: medicare runs deficits too and it's not as first quarter as it ought to be. expanding medicare for all is what i've advocated all along. would be a lot simpler and more firblet but again, the political will isn't there. even though the president prefers that. eleanor: we're in a capitalist society and insurance companies are a major part of capitalism. john: the answer is no. as costs continue to skyrocket,

a.c.a. will need a major overhaul. issue two -- seventh g.o.p. debate. trumpless. where is trump? that was the question on the lips of republican voters this week, as donald trump refused to attend thursdays g.o.p. presidential debate and instead held a veterans fundraising event. some believe mr. trump stayed away for a two-word reason -- megyn kelly, fox news host and debate moderator, who clashed with trump in a previous debate. but trumps main challenger, ted cruz, teased trump, calling him quote/unquote "donald duck." and get this. mr. cruz and another g.o.p. presidential hopeful, carly fiorina pledged to donate $1.5 million to veterans charities if mr. trump agreed to debate them. trump refused. did trump blunder by skipping the debate?

eleanor? eleanor: no. i think he did it impulsively but in the end he was able to conduct his own fundraising event helping wounded warriors and it was covered by msnbc and cnn and i imagine the ratings might have equaled what fox got for the debate. plus he got to watch ted cruz be demolished and watch his two closest rivals, cruz and rubio, go at each other so i don't see that trump lost anything but skipping this debate and i also think his feud is not really with macon kelly. it's with roger ails, who -- pat: trump took a risk in doing this because he was moving along very well. he's rising in the polls in iowa. there's a question whether his ground game is as good as ted cruz but i go -- do agree, i think there's a natural aspect. fox news put out this press release which was taunting and

mocking him at the same time. they seem to have a problem with trump. and i can't blame them. sometimes like reagan in reykjavik where you just pound the table and say i'm going home and you walk out. it was a risk by trump but it worked. you talk about folks this morning, the postgame commentary is all that trump dodged a bullet or did very, very well. one more point, this monday thing in the iowa caucuses, if trump wins, i think he runs to daylight. eleanor: he even extracted an apology from the top at fox news. what's so fascinating, fox news is their megaphone and he's going up against it. i don't exactly see it as trump challenging the base. it's not that brave a thing but he certainly is driving another wedge into the republican coalition. tom: there are a couple of issues here. number one, we should say that

-- i personally have difficulty with, in the net sense yes, it's great that we have fundraising for veterans but at the same time it's not just about putting that yellow la pep pin on. it's about heaping people with -- helping people with post-traumatic stress and brain injuries. but trump, i think, made an error for not going to this debate in the sense that as we get close to the end of the primaries, as the republican establishment and other candidates decide whether trump could be the viable option vs. cruz, that kind of absence, that unpredictability, that sense of narcissism and petulance i think could push schmo so some people off, but again, i think trump's character clarence: i'll way -- wait to see what happens in the iowa caucuses. caucuses are funny.

eleanor: on the republican side you just go in and cast your vote, i believe. pat: i've been in the caucuses at one time. it's a much harder thing. you need an organization, dedicated people working constantly. it's not like new hampshire where they just go and pull a lever. we really ought to talk about this possibility -- again, if trump wins iowa -- eleanor: he could run the table. pat: by the time all these establishment guys all get together and draw straws on who's going to take him down, he could run the table all the way to the nomination. john: what do you think of megyn kelly? the video melange on the immigration bill for the selectively edited out of context cheap shot and it validated trump's decision to

take himself out of kelly ayes's line of fire. eleanor: i'm sure that wasn't kelly's sole decision to make. i thought that was an innovative way to present both cruz and rubio with their string of statements that don't match up while they're going at each other. i thought that was clever and very legitimate. point of view i think she did a good job in this debate, kelly did and she was under the gun here. all these moderators are too involved. they're acting liked a ver serrie candidates and they -- adversary candidates and they ought to let the guys debate and ask questions. those are attack ads. tom: and chris was challenging ted cruz when he tried to turn ntitle a pop 2 caricature.

two liberals here -- clarence: i see no reason for the moderators to be -- am i missing something? i see no reason for the moderators to be so courteous as to let the candidates run the show. they're supposed to be answering questions and be held accountable. eleanor: there were too many -- pat: meet the press and go after it. go after them. when the candidates debate, let the candidates debate. eleanor: well, they did. cruz and rubio actually did do that and there were too many canned speeches, especially from rubio and not enough follow-up questions. they let them get away with all those canned speeches. pat: they were canned speeches but they have a right to deliver hem. a year when people want democratic change and thousandses are coming out to bernie to overthrow the system and trump is going to overthrow the system.

if we get, after bush 41, bush 43, bush 45, do you really think that's what the country wants? eleanor: it may not be what you want -- clarence: this is a test of the far right, isn't it? here you have donald trump going ahead against political correctness and everything and doing remarkably well. this is going to be a big decision for voters to make. john: how did he do it? how did he accomplish that? he did it by skipping -- and the frontrunner always has more to lose than to gain from a detective. on stage, rubio and rand paul got the most mileage out of the debate, yes or no? rubio and rand paul. pat: no. john: why, why, why? pat: i think i agree with eleanor. i think rubio, he's representative and he's got these sort of canned speeches.

fortunately, an element of luck, i think trump got the most out of it. eleanor: i agree with that and rubio simply says when i'm president -- pat: sure, the others all fight with eve other. we're going to find out monday, john. clarence: trump has turned logic on its held. i thought cruz did an excellent job of describing the insult that trump handed the people of iowa by skipping this debate. if they take that as yes, trump is right, so be it. i have a feeling trump may have hurt himself. jim: how strong is the feeling? eleanor: trump was just a few miles away holding this event and saying he wishes her at the debate but they didn't apologize to him soon enough. clarence: that's what i mean, we turn logic on its head. bloomberg flee --

takes the plunge? who says there's only room for one billionaire in a presidential election? not the arch-capitalist with his $36 billion, former mayor of new york city michael bloomberg, who is actively considering a run for president of the u.s. some think he will run regardless of who gets the democratic nomination. bloomberg says he will run only if it looks like hillary might not be the democratic nominee. if bloomberg runs, will there be a reverse ross perot effect? meaning he'll help the republican nominee by pulling votes away from the democratic nominee. tough picture, buchanan? pat: yeah, i do and i think you're right. 4-5 bloomberg votes would come out of the democratic party. he's socially very, very liberal. pro-gay marriage.

wants to take away folks' guns. wants to put limits on what you can drink, the size of cups and stuff and smoking any irish bars. what he will do, he will not win a single state. secondly, he will singh the democratic candidate in the state of new york because that's his strongest precinct, new york city itself and the last time he spent $100 million and barely beat an african-american guy who was given no funds by the democratic party and if he had been, bloomberg wouldn't have been elected mayor. republicans ought to pray -- eleanor: this is not the first time he's looked at a race and he always backs away because he's said repeatedly if he doesn't see a way to win he's not going to do it. and he's said held only get in if the nominees for trump or cruz on the republican side, bernie sanders on the democratic side. so hillary clinton is going to get the nomination to save him

the trouble. hn: why did bloomberg say he might run if hillary doesn't win the domination, i ask you, clarence. coleen: those are heavily overlapping with hillary's folks. john: hillary is too formidable or him to beat. clarence: you mean one -- run against hillary? yeah, he thinks hillary would be too formidable for him to beat. and if hillary is not there, you're going to have bernie sanders, although i suspect joe biden would get in tom: the problem he faces is that ultimately as a candidate in the 2016 election, he's in a perfect no man's land. a new york billionaire and imagine how the frump crowd would react to him. he'd say look, this is why i need to be here. the base hit.

guy. pat: sanders would carry vermont. eleanor: i don't know. tom: who would bloomberg win? eleanor: if he won a handful of states, he could prevent either of the two other candidates from getting the 270 electoral votes, which would then throw the election into the houchings, which is republican. he'd be handing trump the election. he's not going to get in pat: florida, broward county, dade county, all those jewish liberal folks would vote for bloomberg. eleanor: you know about those votes in florida, don't you? [laughter] john: let me say something good about bloomberg and the way he presents himself. clarence:ware not saying anything bad about him, just that he's not going to be

elected president. john: i think you're trying to skewer him. clarence: will be elected president after banning large coca-cola cups? pat: can't have a cigarette in a bar? let the bartender decide that. tom: i have to say i have sympathy for that sugar tax thing because i don't want to subsidize some idiot in terms of their future health care costs because they want to drink a gallon of sugar every day. you want to substance diles their health care costs? pat: let him throw up in the stadium -- clarence: i think you're both right. people have the freedom to destroy themselves with sugar. that's what it comes down. to john: lower the volume. on a political tease scale? 0 to 10. zero meaning zero cheese, ross perot and 10 meaning total

tease, joe biden, where does bloomberg stand? is it a zero meaning he'll run or a 10 meaning he's a tease. is this time for real? pat: i think he's serious. we just all agree that he ain't going to be president of the united states butible -- i think he believes he may be. eleanor: he's going to have to decide by mid february because we'll have to put machinery in place by early march. i suspect he'll back away. tom: yeah, he has as much chance as jim gilmore. clarence: i think he's testing the waters and the answer will be no, he's not going to run. john: every four years he fantasizes about running. clarence: many of us do. ew actually do it. issue four -- cairo 2016. five years ago this week, a

political earthquake shook the middle east, the revolution in egypt. dictator hosni mubarak was overthrown. since then, egypt has been a nation in flux. initially the muslim brotherhood government of mohammed morsi mubaraks successor until it was overthrown by the egyptian army. a military government under former general abdel fatah el-sisi took charge. eleanor clift brought a semblance -- el-sisi brought a semblance of stability to egypt, but his government has also imposed political repression on democracy activists and islamist political movements. forin a disconcerting trend the united states egypts traditional closest ally president el-sisi is openly building a diplomatic and military pact with russia. what explains russian-egyptian

relationship? eleanor: i think because el-sisi's human rights violations are much greater than anything mubarak ever did. i think he's worried that the considerable aid he gets from the u.s. might be in danger. he's hedging his bets. pat: i think ell nor is basically right. this fellow is a hardline military dictator in the line of nasar and assad and the rest of them. i think he sees president obama basically appearing to withdrawal graurgely in the middle east, having been burnt in all these places and i think he wants an anchor to win. besides the russians are in syrians. the russians are players again. tom: it's a binding of economic interests in terms of the russians saying putin and i are the reliable partner.

president obama is distrented. i think they feel they've been burned by the obama administration in terms of criticism on human rights. it's a criminally difficult issue because the administration has to talk up to some agree about human rights because one of the big reasons america has long been hated in the middle east is because people show soosh see america supporting freedom of speech but supporting dictators. coleen: in this case we've pulled back from support of mubarek and we've been crigsed for that. eleanor: i don't know how reliable an ally put season going to be. the russians and the u.s. are basically on the same page with regard to syria and the civil war. clarence: they are now. eleanor: because there is a shotgun marriage. pat: we're on the same page with syria, iran, hezbollah and the

syrian army if the army is isis. that's what a lot of people believe. tom: assad is going to keep killing sunnis. pat: you bring down assad and you get isis and we have to go in and fight him? om: it has to be diplomacy but you have to get concessions from the russians, and iranians and assad and you could do that but the problem is we're just giving up. offensive from actually are talks going on and the iraqis and iranis can get there -- they may not succeed but i think everyone recognizes that diplomacy is the way. pat: the middle east can't make up their minds that isis is the real enmy. the turks thinks it's the kurds. saudi arabia it's -- thinks it's assad. you bring him down and you get al qaeda or isis in damascus.

clarence: same with iraq. john: am i crowding you? clarence: only slightly, john. john: three factors make the egyptians any the u.s. is un leeble -- unreliable. the speed with which obama turned on mubarek. remember that. the speed of obama's embrace of morsi and the brotherhood and the withholding of aid from egypt's military. do the egyptians feel the russians are more reliable? eleanor: this is an election year -- this is a selective view of history. obama acted with speed. there were hundreds of thousands of the people in tahrir square for weeks on end and morsi was the recognized government. the u.s. was not supposed to recognize him? i think it's really easy to

judge these steps in hindsight. john: forced prediction. name the winners for each party and next week's iowa caucuses. pat: bernie and the donald. eleanor: clinton and trump. tom: bernie and ted. clarence: clinton and cruz. john: the answer is trump and cruz for republicans and sanders and clinton for democrats. bye-bye.

hello, and welcome to "kqed newsroom." i'm thuy vu. on our show, efforts to stop human trafficking and teaching engineering through play. but first, the super bowl and the city's homeless. next week, worldwide media will descend on san francisco to cover the super bowl. activists are planning protests to draw attention to the issue of homelessness. it's long been one of san francisco's most intractable problems. now highlighted by encampments that seem to be growing. reporter monica lamb takes a closer look. >> reporter: it's a daily routine. city crews across san francisco clean up around homeless encampments. every day, a ton of trash is