Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Harris Lays Out Economic Plan Focusing On Food, Housing & Tax Cuts; How Do Trump's Communist Claims Land?; Harris Versus Trump: The Impact On Your Money; Local Pennsylvania GOP Official Says He'll Vote For Harris; Answering Viewer Questions About Artificial Sweeteners. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired August 16, 2024 - 16:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[16:00:00]

(MUSIC)

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN HOST: Vice President Kamala Harris just said, this election is about two very different visions. That is an understatement.

THE LEAD starts right now.

From Bidenomics to the Kamala Harris plan, the vice president's big promises in an economic agenda finally out in public. How does her plan compared to former President Donald Trump's? Which one is better for you? We're going to compare the two.

Plus, Donald Trump's 2024 strategy reveal what he said about trying to, quote, define his opponent. It may explain his latest communist line of attack.

And a Republican Party leader from a battleground state, Pennsylvania, will be here. Why he doesn't trust Donald Trump to be president again.

(MUSIC)

MATTINGLY: Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Phil Mattingly, in for Jake Tapper.

It is a massive day on the 2024 election, and that's after it already very, very big week. Kamala Harris, just outlining some of her economic plans two days after former President Donald Trump announced many of the key pillars of his economic plan, both of them choosing the same state as the backdrop for their remarks.

Harris just laid out a plan that she says would make housing, groceries, health sure and raising children more affordable, specifically, calling for a new child tax credit and an expansion the earned income tax credit, calling for more affordable housing, and assistance for first-time homebuyers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: More than 100 million Americans will get a tax cut. We will end America's housing shortage by building 3 million new homes and rentals.

I'll lower the cost of insulin and prescription drugs for everyone with your support, not only our seniors.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Harris says her plan is a direct contrast to Donald Trump and his economic plan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS: He plans to give billionaires massive tax cuts year after year. You know, I think that if you want to know who someone cares about, look who they fight for.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: So lets start with what they're talking about, the top line of the two plans from the former president and the vice president now facing off in the 2024 campaign, Harris laying out in detail tax cuts for lower and middle-class Americans and expansion of the child tax credit or federal ban price gouging has been something that campaign has been talking a lot about, the former president wanted to reauthorize the significant 2017 tax cuts and adding to that, actually lowering the corporate tax rate that was already lowered during those tax cuts and implementing across the board tariff.

So that's the top line, 30,000-foot of the policy what they're talking about. Where they're talking about also absolutely critical, they both been in North Carolina this week.

Now this is a state that Donald Trump won by about 75,000 votes in 2020. In fact, the Republican candidate has won this state and ten out of the last 11 presidential elections, Barack Obama in 2008, the only Democrat to actually intrude on that effort over the course of the last several decades.

What happened in 2016, Donald Trump won by actually more, 173,000 votes in the state. So why is the vice president there, why are Democrats keying on North Carolina?

Well, look at one other thing that happened in 2016, scroll down to the other statewide race. The Democrat actually one, Roy Cooper, narrowly beating Pat McCrory, what happened in 2020? Joe Biden lost, Roy Cooper won. He actually won more votes than Donald Trump did in 2020.

What else are Democrats looking at? Well, Roy Cooper is term limited out. There's a Republican candidate, the current lieutenant governor, that Democrats believe is extreme. They believe that opens the door for down-ballot to have some opportunities.

But what they'll pay more attention to than anything else is population. Yes, there's politics, yes, there's the pathway. Donald Trump has to win North Carolina if he wants to get to 270 electoral -- electoral votes. But Democrats are also looking at a massive increase in population in the state over the course of the last several years.

In fact, more than 400,000 new voters have moved into North Carolina just since 2022, places in particular, the Raleigh, Durham metro area and the Charlotte metro area, Democratic strongholds. No question about that.

Among the top ten fastest-growing metro areas in the entire country Democrats think that means opportunity. There often younger voters, voters of color, suburban voters, that voting bloc, essentially that's been critical to the Democratic winning coalition in 2020. Some their midterm wins as well.

How do you actually show what this looks like? Why was the vice president in Raleigh, North Carolina?

[16:05:01]

Well, let's look at this population growth. Now this is from 2016 to 2022, where you see in these two metro areas specifically, the darker purple, that means more people have moved in and you see in those metro areas, 15 percent, 20 percent population growth just over that period of time, 2016 to 2022, counties in particular, Democrats have their eye on.

Right here, you see the very dark purple and right here, Johnson and Franklin County, these are technically counties Donald Trump won in 2020 -- in 2016 and 2020, they have both seen significant growth over the course of the last several years, more than 11 percent since the 2020 election for both of those counties, Democrats are eyeing that, looking who's coming in, looking to makeup of those voters and thinking there might be opportunities not just to win in the actual urban areas pushed out in the suburbs, but even into the excerpts as well.

So why do you see Kamala Harris in North Carolina? That's why -- why do you see Donald Trump in North Carolina, that's why, why do you see both campaigns now, starting to spend big in this state? We talk about the battleground states, North Carolina for the better part of the last couple of weeks, has not then considered one of the top battleground states. And yet at the very end of last month, moving into this month, all sudden you started to see Republicans spending money there.

They know they have a real battle on their hands.

So, the economic policies, the political pathway, the population growth -- let's jump right into how all of this is playing with voters, with longtime Republican pollster and strategist Frank Luntz.

Frank, when it comes to the economic plans, we heard the vice president lay out part of her economic agenda today, Donald Trump, at his news conference yesterday, tried to get ahead and cast her as a communist. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT & 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Now, Kamala is reportedly proposing communist price controls. She wants price controls. That leads to food shortages, rationing, hunger, dramatically more inflation. She's running on the Maduro plan.

I think this is a different kind of a race. All we have to do is define our opponent as being a communist or socialist, or somebody that's going to destroy our country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Frank, I think that's the -- the former president lays it out right there, right? We're trying to define our opponent. They're very clearly trying to define her as a communist. Her policies aren't communist policies, although they are aggressive in terms of how they operate within markets. How do you think that line of attract -- attack is landing right now?

FRANK LUNTZ, REPUBLICAN POLLSTER: It isn't and it's one of the reasons why Trump has been declining in every survey in just about every state over the last few weeks. The public absolutely wants to focus on inflation, on affordability. They absolute care about prices for food and fuel, housing and health care, and they're not asking for an ideological solution. They're asking for a day-to-day solution.

What Harris proposed in the last few hours is going to play well with voters, at least initially, because they're looking at their wallets and their pocketbooks and they're saying, I can't afford day-to-day life. Trump would be much better off comparing inflation under his administration versus the Biden/Harris administration. Much better off talking about the cost of a Thanksgiving meal because that's something we can all relate to rather than accusing her of being a communist, which is simply not credible.

And this is this is what has happened in the campaign over the last few weeks. And its one of the reasons why so many voters are taking another look at Harris, not because of what she says, but because of what Donald Trump is saying and how much they don't like it.

MATTINGLY: Yeah. And you can tell, Trump's advisers know exactly what you're saying. They literally put prompts behind him yesterday to try and make the exact point. They're trying to get him into that space.

I do want to ask you, though, Frank. We heard Trump raised some eyebrows at a later event yesterday. It was an event on antisemitism. He was honoring the widow of GOP megadonor, Sheldon Adelson. Yet, in his praise for her, he appeared to take a swipe at veterans on some level, listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Miriam, I watch Sheldon sitting so proud in the White House when we gave Miriam the Presidential Medal of Freedom. That's the highest award you can get as a civilian. It's the equivalent of the Congressional Medal of Honor, but civilian version. It's actually much better because everyone gets the Congressional Medal of Honor that soldiers -- they were either in very bad shape because they've been hit so many times by bullets, or they're dead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Frank, as our resident expert on focus groups, what are the dials doing when people hear that?

LUNTZ: Well, that's not an attack on veterans and actually, as a resident professor at West Point, I will tell you that I'm very attuned and paying close attention to any mention of veterans or a men and women in honor in uniform.

In this case, that is not what he meant and he sometimes has a -- sometimes as quite frankly difficulty because he's trying to wrap an attack or trying to figure out some way to paint a picture that is not favorable to his opponents, and sometimes he gets trapped up in what he says.

[16:10:09]

In the end, the veteran vote is going to be important because it's nationwide and at veterans participate, the typical vote is somewhere between 70 and 75 percent Republican.

It matters that they participate just for the sake of their voice being heard. I think Trump has to be much more careful about what he says and how he says it.

And I think he has to be really focused on paying respect to those issues and people and organizations that he agrees with. You're allowed to criticize, but you're not allowed to deliver ad hominem attacks.

I'm very careful about what I say in your network, about what I say in all media, because in the end, we're so accustomed to delivering criticism, and not to visually accustom to delivering solutions. And that's what he should be focused on him, particularly the fact that he had a successful administration. Many of these issues, he's not talking about it all. He's just using it as an attempt to attack.

MATTINGLY: Frank Luntz, as always, my friend, appreciate your time.

LUNTZ: Thank you.

MATTINGLY: And my panel joins me now.

Erin Perrine, I want to start with you because this is what Republicans on some level, like claim veterans, rightly, as Frank was saying, that the votes are there, they have an advantage there, but we've seen the former president attacked veterans. John McCain is the one who immediately comes to mind.

What Frank saying there, being loose with talk on this type of stuff, does it -- it's bizarre. Does it have any effect? ERIN PERRINE, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, AXIOM STRATEGIES: It can

certainly have an effect on a number of voting blocs, depending who he's directing the attack at and what the attack is. This is the time in the campaign were carefulness is so important.

I actually give Kamala Harris and her team big credit for really not putting getting her out there that much, by not having her do interviews, by not having do sit-downs or pressers because right now, she's so nicely controlled as compared to where Donald Trump does these freewheeling pressers. And to his credit, he's not afraid to take a question. He's not afraid to engage with a reporter or push back or talk about any number of topics.

But that carefulness with which the Harris campaign is operating right now is why you're seeing that climb in the polls for her is because they're giving her a look and say, this is someone who is measured in her response. And that is the way we like to hear things right now. It's about feelings and right now, the American people are feeling better about her delivery, than about his more bombastic delivery.

MATTINGLY: Yeah, and the Harris campaign has been extremely aggressive. We've seen it throughout the course of -- well, Harris has been talking about policy issues that were on this as well, their statement almost immediately afterwards, Donald Trump knows nothing about service to anyone or anything but himself for him to insult Medal of Honor recipients just as he previously attacked Gold Star families, mocked prisoners of wars and referred to those who lost their lives and service to our country as suckers, should remind all Americans that we owe it to our service members, our country and our future to make sure Donald Trump is never our nation's commander in chief again.

PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah, that's where there ought to be doing. I'm really happy to hear that for a couple of reasons politically. First off, it's not just about veterans. I love pollsters, but they think women care about abortion and veterans get me care about -- I'm not a veteran. I never finished the Boy Scouts. Okay.

But I honor those who have served, and Mr. Trump, he refused to visit a cemetery in France where better man than he gave their lives so that he could be free. He refused. He said that John McCain, he was sitting with Frank Luntz when he did it, by the way, that John McCain was not a hero because he had been captured, the POW.

Whether this was an insult, I think it's a closer call. It really is.

But when you contextualize it with him, he stood in Section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery over the grave of a man who gave his life for our country. And told the guy's dad, a four-star marine general himself, I don't get it. What was in it for them? And calling are dead -- war dead, suckers and losers.

He said, he didn't want wounded worse at his events because he said, I'm quoting him here, no one wants to see that. I mean, that -- so you put it into context and so it may not be that

this was a deliberate attack on our veterans. They may not be, but it's in the context of a man who never misses an opportunity to insult our veterans.

MATTINGLY: And at the same time where there's an electorate that when you talk Democrats, they've been consistently saying we need to remind them of why they didn't want him in 2020.

It was interesting, J.D. Vance was asked about, should be a recalibration or a pivot are reframing. He said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't think the president needs to pivot and if I told him that, I can guess what he'd say.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Not wrong.

ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Not wrong there, but I'm kind of the exception when it comes to commentary even from Republican strategists, when it comes to Trump right now. I feel like we enter this cycle every time we get close to an election, midterms. And now, if the former president would just focus his messaging on attacking the specific policies of the Biden administration, on talking about the economy, on talking about immigration then he might see more momentum.

[16:15:10]

We hear that a lot. I still hear it from Republican strategists. Instead, you often have him meandering a wave from attacking actually the policies of the Biden administration and moving towards personal attacks. And it seems like even what were talking about here is in line with that. And we've seen that the past couple of weeks now, as you've seen, the vice president pick up momentum and him lose some of those momentum.

MATTINGLY: Yeah, Olivia, the tell for me is always, what's down ballot doing? What are they seeing? I mean, that was the tell for Biden not having much more time on the ticket.

You have great reporting on this fascinating call between the NRCC chair and members last night, are they nervous right now? What's the message?

OLIVIA BEAVERS, CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, POLITICO: I've noticed this huge shift from Republicans being overconfident and sort of giddy, guilty to when Harris is in the race and they're watching this shift to polls, they're now in a state of concern.

The NRCC chairman was raising concern about how Democratic fundraising was way more advanced and pulling in more money than they've been able to. But there has been more kind of broader concerns. And at a Wyoming retreat at the Four Seasons with top GOP leadership, I heard that peppered into these conversations. There were concerns about whether this moment for Harris is a baked in the race or whether it's a honeymoon period because Republicans are worried and they're worried what that means down-ballot for them.

And so, if these are already starting to penetrate the conversations, it shows that Republicans are way more nervous than they're saying publicly.

MATTINGLY: Yeah, it's -- it's fascinating. There's a lot going on. It's been an interesting month or so. Don't worry, 80-plus days left to go.

Guys, thank you very much. Really appreciate. Happy Friday.

So who has the better economic plan? The vice president or the former president? Is there any truth to their attacks on one another? Two voices, but two very different takes will debate what's playing out.

But first, from jobs, to housing, to retail sales, a reality check on a huge week of economic news. What does it all mean for you? An insider on the state of the U.S. economy is here next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:20:56]

MATTINGLY: In our money lead, we know the economy is the most pressing issue on voter's minds. It can also be slightly confusing to parse the data coming out with the emotions of consumers.

Here to help us understand is Austan Goolsbee. He's head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

I really appreciate you being here. Yeah -- I have used your terminology of the golden path. I think first heard it on Odd Lots -- shout-out to Joe and Tracy. It's great podcast. But -- about whether or not we could actually get the soft landing, the pathway to the soft landing.

Can I ask you, when you look at the economy broadly right now, this week's numbers on inflation dropping, concerns from major retailers though like Starbucks and Home Depot, like a week ago, everything was falling apart, we were in a recession or in a depression. It wasn't really sure yet. What do you tell American people who are trying to figure this all out?

AUSTAN GOOLSBEE, PRESIDENT AND CEO, FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF CHICAGO: Well, it depends which part of America. The markets, they are prone to fly off the handle and react to things, and I understand why. But you get news from Japan, you get one disappointing jobs number, the stock market is going to collapse. Then one day later, the stock -- stock market is back.

The -- when the Fed is looking at the economy, we're not looking at the daily gyrations of the stock market. To ordinary Americans, I think it's most important to take the through line. Look over -- don't take any one series, or one month's report or one number. The overall in '23, inflation fell almost as much as it's fallen ever before on record. And we did not have a serious recession when that occurred, and that's quite unusual.

And we've got to hope that we got a little more of that magic to go in '24. And right now, we've got some cross currents. We've got some things that are concerning. We've got some things that still look pretty strong and so that's where we're all trying to figure out where we are.

MATTINGLY: The -- one of the clear warning signs and this has actually been mentioned in the political sense, but it is a data issue as well. The level of debt, Americans holding -- it's at a record high -- more than 100,000 for the average household with more than 8,000, on average, of that in credit cards. How big of a potential threat are those numbers?

GOOLSBEE: It's -- the issue of debt and leverage, in our terminology, is always a serious issue. Now, that said, you want to scale it by income and scale it by the interest rate. Its not just the raw level of debt. It's kind of as a share of income.

That said, if you look at credit card delinquencies, they have been rising for several months and that's one of the warning signs that I've -- that I personally look at that when delinquency start rising, or if you look at small business defaults when they're rising, historically that's not a great sign. Yet, they started from a very low level.

So the level of the delinquencies is still not terrifying but the fact that its cooling is a yellow light of concern.

MATTINGLY: I mentioned the golden path, blink twice if you're thinking half-point cut in September --

(LAUGHTER)

MATTINGLY: No, you can't talk about this stuff and I'm very cognizant of that fact. However, you seemed more optimistic than most, earlier than most, that it was actually possible to land the plane here on some level.

Do you still have that optimism that the golden path, the soft landing, that it's -- its an cards at this point.

GOOLSBEE: Well, that look, that's what for 2023. That's what I call the golden path was. Maybe we could get inflation down without a deep recession. And there were a lot of leading economists who looked at the historical record and said, no, no, that is -- that is impossible.

You had Larry Summers say, we will not get an inflation down and less unemployment goes over 6 percent for five consecutive years. We did pull that off in 2023. Now, for 2024, I do have concerns.

[16:25:00]

We got crosscurrents going in the data as I described, some strong, some weaker. I do have concerns that we set the interest rate at this level more than a year ago. And the conditions were very different a year ago and we've seen inflation coming in better than we expected. And we've seen the labor market cooling a little faster than we expected.

So I just want us to collectively -- I think we should take a step back and think about that.

MATTINGLY: Austan Goolsbee, one of the best in the business at explaining this stuff to normal people, always appreciate your time, my friend. Thank you.

GOOLSBEE: Great to see you again.

MATTINGLY: So can Donald Trump really bring down gas prices? Can Kamala Harris really do anything to slow inflation?

Two different takes on the proposals presented by the candidates. But, first, a live look inside the venue for next week's Democratic national convention. Yes, it's in Chicago. Jake Tapper will help lead special coverage starting Monday night at 7:00 right here on CNN.

We're back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: In our money lead this week, both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris showered us with very big promises about how they will help the economy, even if the short -- they short on details on how and whether those promises will actually work.

[16:30:13]

So, we've asked a pair of experts to debate what both presidential candidates are actually promising.

Steve Moore, when you ask the former president or his team about his inflation plan, they talk about energy prices, "drill, baby, drill" to steal the parlance of goodness, maybe 2010 Republicans even leaving climate change aside, which is ignoring a lot. I guess my question with this always is this is already a top gas producer, an oil producer did they, don't drive global oil prices in isolation.

What do they mean here?

STEVE MOORE, DISTINGUISHED FELLOW, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Is that -- is that for me?

MATTINGLY: Yes. Steve, please?

MOORE: Okay. Sure. So, look, we were completely energy independent when Trump was president. We were really proud of the fact that he had achieved something that we haven't achieved in 50 years. We weren't dependent on Russia. We weren't dependent on OPEC. In fact, OPEC -- we didn't even talk about OPEC when he was president.

Now you're right. We are producing a record amount of oil today, but guess what? That's because the price of oil is about 40 percent more expensive than it was when Trump was president.

So, we -- our -- our analysis shows we'd be producing three or four million more barrels a day with a pro-drilling policy that builds the pipelines and the infrastructure, the leasing that we need. So we could be energy dominant again. And I do agree with Trump if we'd stuck with that policy, I don't think you'd see Russian tanks in Ukraine today.

MATTINGLY: Catherine, the vice president, a focal point of what --

CATHERINE RAMPELL, CNN POLITICAL & ECONOMIC ANALYST: Can I just --

MATTINGY: No, no, please. Yeah.

RAMPELL: Sorry. Can I at least amend that? Yes.

RAMPELL: Because a lot of it's wrong. We are energy independent today if you are measuring energy independence by the fact that we are exporting more oil than we are importing. In fact, we've been such for over two years, the longest stretch in American history.

And that was the metric by which Trump seemed to refer -- Trump and supporters like Stephen Moore referred to energy independence when Trump was in office, which we briefly had and we've now had for longer under Biden.

I don't think either president to be clear, you know, controls the energy -- the oil spigot, but we have had -- we are now producing more oil today in this country than any other country on earth has ever produced. Not only that, we also have record production of natural gas, of solar, of wind, record battery production, storage capacity.

So the idea that there's some sort of war on American energy is just bogus. All of those things have been going up under Biden. In fact, he's approve more drilling permits on federal lands than Trump did.

So there's this narrative out there that is just completely false, that Biden somehow stopped the oil spigot.

MOORE: Well, can I -- Catherine, Catherine, then explain why it is that gasoline has 45 percent more expensive today at the gas pump? That's what Americans care about. We should be producing -- no, we should be producing -- we could be producing three or four --

(CROSSTALK)

RAMPELL: Do you know a good way to get gas prices down? Do you know a good way to get prices down?

MOORE: What?

RAMPELL: Have a global pandemic and have everybody stay at home. That is why prices plummeted in 2020. That is 100 percent why. That's why oil prices were negative briefly in 2020. We had a pandemic.

MOORE: Catherine, even before the pandemic, the price of gas was about 40 percent cheaper than it is today. And I don't get --

RAMPELL: Yeah, but also --

MOORE: Wait a minute, hold on. You can't --

(CROSSTALK)

RAMPELL: The overall CPI has increased.

MATTINGLY: Go ahead, Steve.

(CROSSTALK)

MOORE: Have you -- have you -- hold on -- have you told all your green friends that we're producing record amounts of oil and gas? I thought the idea for Kamala Harris and Joe Biden is net-zero and now you're having a --

(CROSSTALK)

RAMPELL: Look, I don't represent Joe Biden. I don't represent Joe Biden.

MOORE: I know, but what I'm saying is --

RAMPELL: I know you represent Donald Trump. I know you're a surrogate for Donald. I don't represent any political candidate.

MOORE: I do it.

RAMPELL: I have written many times about the record oil production.

(CROSSTALK)

MATTINGLY: Hey, guys, hold on one second.

(CROSSTALK)

MOORE: Hold on, what I'm saying, though, is that Joe Biden and Kevin Harris are talking out of two sides of their mouth. They're telling all their environmental friends, were going to eliminate fossil fuels. And then on the other hand, they're saying, well, we're producing records, amounts of it. You can't have it both ways.

RAMPELL: No.

MATTINGLY: It's been a complicated balancing act.

RAMPELL: I mean, those are what the facts are.

MATTINGLY: Yeah, no. I do want to ask you there, Catherine, you make a good point. You have been sharply critical of the Biden administration and some of the Harris proposals when you feel like its merited, one of them being what has been a focal point of what they've been talking about this week, which is a, quote-unquote, federal ban on price gouging. Donald Trump has called it the communists, as prices will come down quickly if he's elected.

I think I'm trying to think in economic history which you both know far better than me, but I think yesterday was the 53rd anniversary of President Nixon announcing federal wage and price controls.

MOORE: Yeah, it was.

MATTINGLY: It didn't work.

Catherine, the kind of validity of this proposal, is it something that could work?

RAMPELL: I mean, I don't exactly know what she's even proposing with this anti-price gouging idea.

[16:35:02]

Nobody can define price gouging. It's like porn, I know it when I see it as the famous line goes, which is part of the problem here. So we don't really know what she's proposing. The fact sheet the admin -- excuse me, that the campaign put out a few days ago had a lot of things that were -- that I found quite disturbing that indicated the template for this proposal would be something like the legislation Kamala Harris sponsored in 2020 with Elizabeth Warren and that Elizabeth Warren has since re-introduced this year in a slightly different form. That would essentially look like price controls.

If you listen to what Kamala Harris said today in her speech, it was actually frankly much more restrained and much more toned down within what the campaign had put out a few days ago, which gives me hope that maybe they're not going to go down this very bad and silly path in which as you point out, has been very harmful in other countries that are implemented price controls.

But we don't know what this is going to look like. I would love to see more details, content, campaign if you're willing to share them.

MATTINGLY: Steve, can I ask, on this issue of grocery prices, we saw the former president was flanked by group yesterday. His team thinks that this is a really winning contrast message for them. What's his plan? Is there a plan to bring down grocery prices?

MOORE: Well. Yeah I mean we just do what Trump did in his first term. I let -- let's not forget, Phil, that if you look at Trump record on inflation, it -- when he left office, inflation was one-and-a-half percent and then 18 months later after Biden and Harris spent $5 trillion, we had 9 percent inflation rate.

And so, it's obvious that if you've done about inflation on bringing prices down, Trump has a much better record. In fact, the average inflation rate under Trump in his four years in office was 1.9 percent, which is actually below what the Fed wants as a target. Meanwhile, under Harris and Biden, you've had an average inflation rate of six-and-a-half percent.

And the reason that's its important by the way, I think the reason that Harris is fighting back on this is because the average American has lost $2,000 of income since Biden came into office. That's a big loss.

MATTINGLY: This is something I honestly we should block a full hour off for you guys to go back. And I know -- I could see Catherine -- Catherine's ready to rock and roll about supply chain issues, the spending from the Trump administration.

RAMPELL: Well, and also, Trump actually has proposed on prices which would cause them to go up.

MATTINGLY: We're going to have to do this. I'm pitching this to everyone at this point.

Catherine and Stephen, always love Justice Potter Stewart Friday references, thank you guys. We'll have a debate.

MOORE: Thank you.

MATTINGLY: A GOP leader in battleground Pennsylvania bucking his party. He says he refuses to vote for Trump in November. What pushed him to this point and his message to fellow Republicans with 81 days until Election Day?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:41:58]

MATTINGLY: We're back with our 2024 lead.

A big break from the party causing a stir in battleground Pennsylvania. The Republican chairman in Upper Marion Township, just outside of Philadelphia, says he won't vote for Donald Trump and encourages his fellow Republicans not to as well.

Matt McCaffrey is a combat veteran who served in Iraq, and in an op-ed for the "Philadelphia Inquirer". He wrote, quote, Trump spits in the face of the sacrifice we veterans made, and I cannot believe I brought myself to vote for him in 2016.

He goes on to say: I'm not offended by him. I pity him and I don't trust him to be president again.

Matt McCaffery joins me now.

Matt, I really appreciate your time. You say January 6 was a tipping point for you. You also pointed to Trump saying Senator John McCain, a wounded Vietnam veteran, was not a war hero, calling Americans killed in combat, quote, suckers and losers.

And now you can add to it last night. Trump said the civilian Medal of Freedom is better than the military Medal of Honor, because soldiers to receive the Medal of Honor our severely wounded or dead. I think the question is, why do you feel -- why do you think your fellow Republican leaders don't see the former president of the way you do?

MATT MCCAFFERY, REPUBLICAN MUNICIPAL ELADER, UPPER MERION, PA: That's a great question, Phil. I can't figure it out myself, especially being here in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, where we just keep on losing. I got involved in the Republican committee in 2022 to try to turn the tide, right? And obviously, I didn't do very well.

But I keep on fighting the good fight. I want to get good Republicans elected to office, especially here in Montgomery County. And as long as Trump is on the top of the ticket, were just going to keep losing. So that's kind of where I'm at, is, you know, he's not a really good guy. I mean, everyone could see just look at what he said last night. It's more of the same like I addressed in my op-ed. And as long as he's on top of the ticket, we're just going to keep losing.

MATTINGLY: I know there has been public backlash from some Republicans. I guess my question is, what are Republicans say to you privately? Have you gotten calls from people that maybe you wouldn't expect saying they agree with you or has it all been pretty consistently pro-Trump?

MCCAFFERY: Yeah. I would say it's pro Trump, but a lot of the folks that I interact with, people that are in my orbit -- this is no surprise, like I, you know, I don't like this guy. I don't think has -- he's fit to be the president United States, he's proved that.

So folks aren't surprised by my stance, but they will say, listen man, I get it. Like I get why you're doing this. You know, this is what we believe in. So they're not coming out of the woodwork and praising me or anything like that, but I'm getting a lot of yeah, yeah, we get it.

MATTINGLY: The bylaws and correct me if I'm wrong, on the technical aspects here, but the bylaws for the county, Pennsylvania Republican committee say that committee members are supposed to support the endorsed ticket. I think you're facing a disciplinary hearing over this.

Should you lose your position?

[16:45:00]

Will you lose your position?

MCCAFFERY: So the hearing is Monday at 6:00 p.m. via Zoom. I do anticipate that I am going to lose that hearing and I will be ousted because I broke the bylaws, you know, by endorsing Vice President Harris for office. I've been pretty open and honest about that.

You know, listen, I said that I would do my job as an elected committee person until 2026 with my message of, it can't -- we got to move away from Trump so I'm going to continue to do that until they kicked me out and my argument is, I didn't commit 34 felonies. I haven't disrespected our veterans and I didn't drag our country through one of the darkest days in American history.

So if I broke a bylaw and you want to kick me out for that? That's fine with me.

MATTINGLY: We'll certainly be watching on Monday.

Matt McCaffery, really appreciate your time. Thanks so much.

MCCAFFERY: See you, brother. Thank you.

MATTINGLY: Well, coming up, the historic move in New Jersey politics today. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:50:02]

MATTTINGLY: In our health lead, many of you use artificial sweeteners, each day, but have questions and some concerns about their safety and effectiveness.

CNN chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, has been digging into those questions. Our viewers have sent in on the topic.

Sanjay, some folks like Ana in Mexico are asking about the potential for cancer from consumer artificial sweeteners. What does the science say here?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, this is really interesting, Phil. I mean, decades ago, there was some studies that came out looking at artificial sweeteners and finding a connection to cancer, but it was specifically bladder cancer and rats. But that caused all sorts of concerns. Subsequently, there were these studies in humans where this did not pan out.

So really, no, no associations between these artificial sweeteners and cancers in humans.

I will say one thing just sort of broadly speaking, when you have things that are widely used in this case, artificial sweeteners, there's associations that pop up. They're much more common, lee found in things that are widely used. So, WHO, for example, has been looking at the concerns around aspartame and its called that a potential carcinogen.

The FDA disagrees with that, and the six approved artificial sweeteners at the FDA has says that there is no association with cancer. You can see those artificial sweeteners on the screen and it can pay attention to anyone else. But for the most part, they are safe. That is not a concern really.

MATTINGLY: Okay. Sanjay, Kaye Thomas in Kansas City, look, I think this is a question a lot of people have when it comes to artificial sweeteners, weight gain or weight loss when it comes to using them. Is there a direct connection? How's this work? GUPTA: Yeah. You know, it's funny, right? You think, hey, I'm not

eating calories or I'm meeting very few calories and I'm still gaining weight. How is that possible?

Well, it's interesting. I mean, there is something to this. First of all, there was this big study came out of Minnesota, 3,000 people. They followed these people over 20 years. So long term study and they were people who were using artificial sweeteners.

And what they found was over that time, they gained more visceral fat, fat in their abdomen versus people who weren't using these things.

Part of the issue is this: these artificial sweeteners are really sweet. I don't know if you know this Phil, but if you look at something like Stevia, it can be 200 to 400 times sweeter than sugar. And essentially that's sort of playing a trick on your brain. Your brain is thinking, hey, I just got all this sweetness now I'm expecting all the energy, all the calories to come with it, but I didn't get it.

So as we've talked about in the past, that's why people will drink diet sodas all day long. And then maybe go get ice cream at night because now they're searching out for those calories. So that's part of the issue, that's part of the trick on the brain that these artificial sweeteners can play. If you're just using these artificial sweeteners, but not changing of the things in your life his style, you may gain weight and you may gain that visceral fat, which is the most, the most troublesome kind of fat.

But if you make other changes in your life as well, having normal healthy diet, exercise, all the things that, you know to do, then they can be a really powerful tool, Phil.

MATTINGLY: It's always the added sentence in every one of these statements. Also with exercise, healthy diet, consistent.

Sanjay Gupta, always appreciate it.

GUPTA: You're going to put me out of a job, Phil.

MATTINGLY: I'm not trying to. No, no, I didn't. I'm not stepping.

Listen to Dr. Gupta. Ignore me entirely.

Sanjay, thank you as always. Appreciate it.

GUPTA: You got it.

MATTINGLY: And we're back with last leads, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:58:17]

MATTINGLY: Our last leads today start in Bermuda, where Hurricane Ernesto is expected to make its next landfall tomorrow morning as it approaches the small island, Ernesto's wind field measures nearly 400 miles and up to a foot of rain. Ernesto has already thrashed Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands this week, leaving hundreds of thousands still immersed in floods and without power or drinking water days after its initial landing.

In our politics lead, a name that might help you win a trivia content. He's right there. That's George Helmy. He's about to become the only U.S. senator of Arab-American descent in the current Congress, but on the first few months. Helmy was chief of staff to New Jersey Democrat's governor.

He will replace disgraced Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey, who was convicted of bribery and resides next week. Voters will elect a permanent replacement for Menendez in November.

In our sports lead, a Romanian gymnast now holds the bronze medal, once awarded to American Olympic gymnast, Jordan Chiles. The reallocation ceremony was held for Ana Barbosu today, she was bumped off the podium when Chiles challenged her results, allowing Olympic judges to revive the score. But this week, that decision was overturned, the medal was transferred to Barbosu.

In a statement, Chiles called the decision unjust, and a significant blow.

Well, coming up on Sunday on "STATE OF THE UNION", House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, and New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu, that's Sunday morning at 9:00 Eastern, and again at noon here on CNN.

And another live look inside the United Center. That'll be center stage it all next week in Chicago, where crews are getting set for that 2024 Democratic National Convention begins in just three days. The speakers lined up.

President Biden, Monday night, plus Hillary Clinton, former President Barack Obama is on Tuesday. Wednesday, former President Bill Clinton. We're going to hear her speak on Thursday, she's one of them.

CNN will have special coverage led by CNN's Jake Tapper, among others. Look out for that starting Monday night here on CNN.

And, of course, you can follow the show on X @TheLeadCNN. And if you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can listen to it wherever you get your podcast.

The news continues on CNN with Wolf Blitzer in Tel Aviv and "SITUATION ROOM".

Have a great weekend.