Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Global Markets Drop Sharply On Trump Win; Donald Trump Elected U.S. President; Donald Trump Makes History As 45th U.S. President. Aired 5:30-6a ET

Aired November 09, 2016 - 05:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[05:31:22] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: We're going to have a lot of breaking news this morning. It's a momentous day here. Global markets are down sharply. Reacting to the news of Donald Trump's victory. Christine Romans joins us now with more. What are you seeing, Christine?

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: We had a big sell off right away when it looked like Donald Trump was going to win the presidency and the "Economist" magazine called it fright night for global investors.

Let's look at where things stand right now. U.S. stock futures down pretty sharply here, down still about 304 points off the worst levels, though. It had been much worse than this in the early going.

But still, that is the selloff, many people had predicted if Donald Trump were to win. Here's what it looks like overnight, look what happened last night when it looked like Donald Trump was going to able to secure those electoral votes.

You saw the market fall dramatically and now, it's starting to recover a little bit as cooler heads are prevailing and folks are trying to figure out what could happen here.

Donald Trump's position on trade and immigration could be bad for the global economy, could be bad for the U.S., but could he get something done on, say, tax reform or a big infrastructure built?

We just don't know so that's what folks are talking about right now. Still overnight in Asia, big losses there. You had emergency meetings of financial folks in the governments over there.

Look at Tokyo down 5 percent, 900 points. Europe right now, off the worst levels of the night. Again, a bounce off, but still lower here and you can see this (inaudible). My business colleagues will tell you this is what happens when people are afraid, they rush into gold.

You can see gold here. Quick, this is the peso, record low for the Mexican peso. The worry is that Trump's view on the U.S. relationship with Mexico, building a wall, on immigration, would be very, very detrimental to the Mexican economy. And this peso has been really a proxy for Donald Trump and his immigration proposals. Three hours almost to the opening bell. I predict with great certainty, unpredictable markets for the next --

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Hold on, Christine, that answer will get you a seat at the table. Come join us. Now, in full disclosure. The markets, futures they're moving now. They're not as deep as they were. They are expected to open down. We'll keep an eye on it.

Let's discuss the economic implications and the sourcing of the reaction, CNN global economic analyst, Rana Foroohar, and host of "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS," Richard Quest.

Quest, you have a British accent. I blame you for this because this is seen as an analogy to Brexit. That had been rejected by the big brains in our own election, why? Because they said, well, the polling actually showed that Brexit was much closer near the end that it's neglected in the narrative. Do you see similarities?

RICHARD QUEST, CNN HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS: In what happened last night?

CUOMO: Yes.

QUEST: Absolutely. It's Brexit redone on steroids is what happened last night. There's no question about it. It's an angry electorate taking it out at the polls. The problem is, how many of those people this morning will have expected their neighbor to have voted differently and to have given a different result and will now be saying, I can't say it on public television --

CAMEROTA: Voter's remorse?

QUEST: Voter's remorse, absolutely.

CAMEROTA: But what has happened since then in Britain, are there new polls that show that people wish that they had not never voted that way?

QUEST: No, actually not. If you look at the latest and last polls on Brexit, most people say, all right, that's what we've got. That's how we are going to go forward. The difficulty is once you've done it, you've done it.

[05:35:09]And it becomes an issue of practicalities. As Theresa May is discovering in the U.K. at the moment. You've now got -- so in this case in the U.S., you've now got to have the revocation of NAFTA. You've got to repeal and replace Obamacare. You've got to get rid of the TPP. You've got to lower the taxes that you promised.

CUOMO: And the big one --

QUEST: The wall?

CUOMO: You've got to build the wall and I'll tell you what, for Theresa May, daunting task, no question about it and there are a lot of practicalities that people are going to learn about that they didn't know before that vote.

This is harder because that is one thing. You have to leave the union. Let's see if we can do it and how it works. He's got a list of things that now he may not want to deliver on. He may not be able to deliver on and he has a group of people who are demanding that change. Tough balance, Foroohar.

RANA FOROOHAR, CNN GLOBAL ECONOMIC ANALYST: Absolutely. I mean, you know, the trade issues in particular are going to be profound and I that's what everybody is watching. We knew that if this happen, there was going to be a severe sharp market dip, but that things would eventually balance out.

I think we'll see a lot of volatility in the short term, don't get me wrong. But everybody is going to be waiting now to see what is going to happen. Are we going to have a global tariff war? Are we going to have trade war that would then push economy --

CUOMO: Let's not forget, the insiders in that game love the volatility. This is where they beat the mom and pop at home investor because they play the volatility up and down. They make money of it.

ROMANS: If he makes a false move and you hurt the U.S. economy with your trade policies or immigration policies, if you hurt the U.S. economy, you hurt the very people who elected him.

CUOMO: Can he do that? Do you think he can tear up a trade contract?

ROMANS: He says he can.

FOROOHAR: He can create a wave of protectionist sentiment. He's already done that. I mean, you see a lot of trade complaints coming into WTO already. That's going to increase. You may see other countries starting to put up barriers in anticipation of U.S. moves.

QUEST: I just went back and read his speech at the Economic Club in New York. It's quite clear, he says he's going to renegotiate NAFTA. Now, that is the back bone of North American trade at the moment. But he said he's going to do it, so he's got to do it.

CAMEROTA: But how does he do that?

QUEST: He's got to get the consent of the Canadians and the Mexicans as well. You cannot just do it unilaterally.

CUOMO: So what if they say we don't want to renegotiate?

QUEST: Well, the Mexican president has already indicated that he might be agreeable to -- Justin Trudeau is prepared to do it.

ROMANS: What will he do on the wall? He has said that he can use remittances from people living in this country spending their paychecks home, their cash home to Mexico. He can use that, those remittances, to build a wall. I mean, he has said that before. I mean, can you imagine -- CUOMO: But unless it is seen as an emergency measure, it must be a

tax and therefore levied through Congress. So he's not going to be able to unilaterally do it. Does he just blame it on them? I'm trying to do the wall, I can't because of them.

QUEST: Let's also see if President Obama tries to rail through TPP, the Transpacific Partnership through the lame duck Congress before he leaves office.

FOROOHAR: But that is not --

QUEST: Well, he said he's going to try.

FOROOHAR: He said he's going to try. I think that's going to increase the anti-trade sentiment. Trade was Hillary's weak point, always, NAFTA was Hillary weak point. I mean, the fact that -- this vote is if anything, the deep level. It's about anti-establishment sentiment.

Regardless of whether -- you can understand this in working class population in Michigan and Ohio. Even at higher levels people feel that the existing system has not served them as well as it could.

And if Obama tries to basically push down everybody's throat a trade deal that a lot of people don't believe in anymore, I think that's going to be bad.

ROMANS: We thought this was a working class anxiety and we saw in these exit polls that this anxiety spread to people with college degrees and rust belt states. If he can do a big infrastructure build, if you have a GOP-controlled Washington, they can do a big infrastructure build, you could -- that would be the payback for these working class voters --

FOROOHAR: Right.

CAMEROTA: But then the Republicans have to get on board with that.

FOROOHAR: By the way, they're doing tax -- if his plan goes through, tax cuts at the same time unfunded. You're going to get big debt and deficits.

QUEST: Keep in mind, 4 percent growth was the number he said.

ROMANS: He promised 4 percent growth.

QUEST: No, but there's a number out there is what I'm saying. There's a number out there. He's nailed his colors to the mass. Four percent growth is what he's promised for the U.S. economy in terms of growth.

CAMEROTA: We shall see.

CUOMO: Christine, Rana, Brexit, thank you very much.

CAMEROTA: Thank you very much. All right, we want to go to John Berman now for a look at some key Senate races. John, what have you been following?

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, thanks so much, Alisyn. The headline here is the Republicans have retained control of the House and Senate. Right now, the Republicans have at least 51 seats. That guarantees them a majority.

[05:40:03]Let's look at this in a race by race basis. A lot of interesting ones. Let's start with the one bright spot for the Democrats. In Illinois this was the one flip so far, Representative Tammy Duckworth defeated incumbent Senator Mark Kirk easily. That was it for the Democrats.

Marco Rubio elected to a second term defeating Congressman Patrick Murphy. Rubio at one point said he was not running for reelection. He changed his mind, kept the seat.

Look at Indiana, Representative Todd Young beating former Senator Evan Bayh. When Evan Bayh announced he was getting in this race, Democrats said, hey, this one is for us. He turned out to be a flawed candidate. That goes to the Republicans.

Moving on, Missouri very interesting as well, incumbent Senator Roy Blunt, barely defeating the Democratic Secretary of State Jason Kander. This was interesting because Donald Trump barely pulled Roy Blunt over the finish one. This is one where Donald Trump had coattails.

In Nevada, this was a Democratic polls, Catherine Cortez Masto defeated Congressman Joe Heck. This is Harry Reid's seat. Harry Reid is the one Democrat in the country who had a good night last night. He won the state of Nevada for Hillary Clinton and he really helped win this Senate seat for Cortez Masto.

In New Hampshire, this race right now is too close to call. The incumbent Republican Kelly Ayotte with a narrow lead right now. They are still counting votes there, 95 percent counted as they are in the presidential race. But Ayotte has a 1,500 vote margin.

The next state we have here on this list, let's move to North Carolina right now, Richard Burr defeated Deborah Ross, again, Richard Burr would have been in trouble perhaps, had Hillary Clinton done better in that state. Not the case.

Pennsylvania, the same thing, incumbent Republican Pat Toomey won a second term. He defeated Katie McGinty, 48.9 percent. And in Wisconsin, the incumbent Ron Johnson defeated the former Senator Russ Feingold.

A lot of those states you can see Donald Trump's victories made a big, big difference -- Alisyn.

CUOMO: All right, John, thank you for all of that. So Donald Trump stunning upset making Hillary Clinton's blue wall crumble. How did he pull it off? And how did the pollsters get it so wrong? We look at all of that -- next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[05:46:06]

CUOMO: Donald J. Trump, president-elect of the United States. Let's discuss this historic upset with historians. Douglas Brinkley, CNN presidential historian, and Julian Zelizer, a historian and professor at Princeton University.

Gentlemen, this is an uncharted territory, the man or woman, but usually man who forwards the agenda of stoking hate, what people had called demagoguery sometimes raises but does not elevate all the way. He did this time, what does it mean?

DOUG BRINKLEY, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: I think he promoted fear, Franklin Roosevelt, we have nothing to fear but fear itself. He made Americans feel very afraid, very afraid about ISIS, very afraid about immigrants, very afraid about Muslims, very afraid about even your neighbors.

I've always find that problematic. I see it with Joe McCarthy, to kind of paper out McCarthyism. There you have some of those qualities in Donald Trump. He's a nativist candidate.

We've had anti-immigration candidates before. There was a no nothing party in the 19th Century. But now, he's president. Can he not be that way? Can he be a uniter like he did and I thought it was a quite eloquent victory speech.

CAMEROTA: We know what would have been historic about Hillary Clinton's win. What's so historic about Donald Trump's?

JULIAN ZELIZER, HISTORIAN AND PROFESSOR, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY: Obviously, you have somebody who comes with no experience in politics and is now the president of the United States.

CAMEROTA: And that's never happened before?

ZELIZER: Well, we've had Dwight Eisenhower, for example, but he had a lot of military experience then he had some role and even Hoover also had a role in government so that's different. You also have someone who played to the fringe elements of American society, to the anger, hatred, but made it the mains stream message of a party.

Now, he's the president of the United States. I'm more skeptical about the kind of transition that he's going to make. He now has united government. That's the third important part of what's just happened. We're not talking about that.

CUOMO: Well, but you are using the historical definition of united government, which is the Senate and House will have the same party designation, but they ain't united, Douglas. He's got to figure out how to get his own back into his tent. He ran as much against them as he did against Hillary Clinton.

BRINKLEY: And it's a divided population still. This is 2000 Bush versus Gore redone. This is John Kerry versus Bush meaning it's still pretty tight in there. But I think it's going to be interesting to see who is the new Trump cabinet. I think Newt Gingrich has been a cultural survivor. In 1994, the contract with America --

CAMEROTA: Do you think he'll be in the cabinet?

BRINKLEY: I think he may end up --

CAMEROTA: Rudy Giuliani?

BRINKLEY: Giuliani, Homeland Security. Gingrich would have a shot at secretary of state or chief of staff.

CAMEROTA: How about Chris Christie given that he has been wounded by the court case, but he's a loyalist to Donald Trump?

BRINKLEY: Trump likes loyalists. There might be a position for him. I don't know at this --

CUOMO: Do you think he gets through confirmation?

BRINKLEY: I don't think through confirmation. He might have to be the White House adviser on domestic policy or security.

ZELIZER: I mean, I would say, though, even with the divisions in the GOP, it's important we don't overstate that from the start. A lot of his views have support in the House Republican caucus, for example, in immigration. This has been an issue. They now have a president to support them.

And the Republicans lined up behind Donald Trump. I know there are outliers, I know there are critics, but he got the nomination. Most of them did not totally distance themselves from him.

And my guess is through the thrill and excitement of united government and the potential could motivate Republicans in Congress to put aside some of their differences.

CUOMO: Well, he made his immigration plan very simple. It was word for a long time "wall." Most of his own party does not want a wall. Deportation would be easier to sell if he has the money to effect it. So then we saw something that again is going to require some historical analysis.

[05:50:05]He gets there by stoking people's fears and anger, period. Last night, he says no more fear and anger, let's unify. It's usual to hear somebody be as conciliatory as the president of the United States, but when it is direct contradiction to your campaign message, how does that work?

BRINKLEY: Well, he contradicts himself well, right. Walt Whitman once said I am large, I can change multitudes so what if I contradict myself. It's kind of an American characteristic. We talked about him being a Buffalo Bill or P.T. Barnum. But also we like improvisation in America.

Twitter, on the spot. All the things he did. There's kind of an American character, in many ways, Donald Trump. Look, he won. Hillary Clinton, because all good sports she did run a great campaign. She never got rid of the e-mail problem.

She had a kind of Walter Mondale syndrome or something to her. It was an amazing history to mark that we have the first woman to get the nomination of a major party, big deal.

But I don't think there are going to be great write-ups coming in that she ran a kind of campaign -- even though she won all three debates. That's what's amazing.

CUOMO: She won three debates according to whom?

BRINKLEY: According a lot of people, but I think --

CUOMO: But I'm saying maybe not --

BRINKLEY: Good point.

CAMEROTA: So in terms of unity, what does history teach us, even in other countries after all of the toxicity, can there be unity? What's the path to that?

ZELIZER: I'm always skeptical. It doesn't last long. You can think of 9/11, for example, we had a national crisis and there was a moment of unity.

CAMEROTA: Even international unity at that time.

ZELIZER: But it broke down quickly and the partisan divide was so deep that issues like airport security became points of partisan contention months after this horrific attack. And with elections they don't heal.

Many Democrats are waking up, they're anger. They're ready to try to win the White House in the next election. And Republicans are going to double down. I don't think they're going to calm down.

CUOMO: Anything else, the Democrats are afraid. That's something that Trump can use to create progress.

BRINKLEY: Barack Obama I think has an opportunity as a president to kind of bond with Trump in some kind of way this Thursday to move the national narrative forward.

CAMEROTA: We know that's going to be quite a visit on Thursday. It sure will. Gentlemen, thank you very much for all the context.

So how did Donald Trump crack that so-called Democratic blue wall? Let's discuss it with the architect of the blue wall.

CUOMO: He's the author.

CUOMO: Architect, author, builder, he is our senior analyst and senior editor for "The Atlantic," Ron Brownstein. Ron, what are your thoughts this morning? RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: The blue wall in 18 states that have voted Democratic in every election since 1992 is the most states the party had ever won in six consecutive elections, but the three loosest bricks in the wall, historically have been Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Right now, Donald Trump has dislodged them all, although Michigan may go to Hillary Clinton before the night is over. And what's the consistency there? Those are states with a lot of working class white voters.

And part of the Democratic challenge in this election was, their success in presidential races since 1992 has depended in part on an act of political levitation. They have run slightly better than working whites in the Midwest than they had anywhere else in the country even as those voters have moved away from them.

What happened this time was they have moved away from them much more sharply than in the past and they weren't able to sustain that. Donald Trump won white voters without a college degree by a larger margin than Ronald Reagan did against Walter Mondale in 1984.

That is extraordinary. That a 49-state landslide. The proportions, as the graphic shows didn't really change that much. There was a surge at least in the exit polls and the census may have a different opinion when it tell us who voted.

But there wasn't a big change in the composition of the electorate was there was a big change in preference. Not only did Trump win big, big, big among blue collar and white men, we kind of expected.

He won white women without a college education by 28 points. The gap between non-college white women and college white women voted is bigger than the gap between all men and women voter, it exceeded the gender gap.

So you end up with this situation where the geography followed the demography. At the moment, Donald Trump has three razor thin win, one-point wins in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin that are the difference.

Because if she holds those three states, the fact is she won, Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada. Those are states that would have put her over the top if the blue wall had held.

CUOMO: So Clinton underperformed. You didn't have a huge surge in turnout. You didn't have a huge drop off in turnout. You had Trump win a larger percentage of the turnout than expected, which goes dovetails with her underperforming.

[05:55:10]And then you this x factor on top of it, what was the x factor for him?

BROWNSTEIN: I think the x factor, to me, was the death of a thousand cuts. It was that Donald Trump just did better in all of the small places everywhere. Look at every state map. And you seal how few blue counties there are in Wisconsin, in Michigan, even in Minnesota, in Pennsylvania.

There are very, very few places. Obama won a broader range of counties in 2012 and Donald Trump was able to either flip them or narrow the Democratic margins. Look at North Carolina. In North Carolina she did what she wanted to do, look at Wake and Mecklenburg, Raleigh and Charlotte, the two biggest counties.

She won them by 100,000 votes than President Obama won them in 2012. I mean, she pulls together that metropolitan coalition, there the white voters consolidated against Donald Trump.

But he just overwhelmed her little by little in county by county and you saw that in the travel schedule, right, Chris, every week we saw President Obama or Hillary Clinton in Raleigh or Charlotte.

We saw Donald Trump in another small place somewhere in rural North Carolina. And a coalition of restoration of voters who are uneasy with both the economic and cultural and demographic changes in the country unify to a greater extent than the competing coalition of transformation.

Although it is worth noting that before the evening is over, she may be ahead in the popular vote. We have occasion where the Democratic Party would have won the popular vote in six of the past seven presidential elections and will control nothing. Not the presidency, House, Senate, and Supreme Court.

That would be an extraordinary kind of statement about where the kind of the narrow divides, but the inefficiencies in the way the Democratic vote is distributed.

CAMEROTA: Ron, there is still uncertainty at this hour, not all of the numbers are in. Let's look at the popular vote. Look how close this is, 58,700,000 basically to 58,500. So there's only 150,000 difference?

BROWNSTEIN: When you think that California, Oregon, and Washington are most of what's left and she's at like 60 percent and basically in California, and I believe in the other two as well, maybe not Oregon. The odds are reasonably higher that she's going to be ahead in the popular vote.

If that happens you'll have two elections since 2000 where we've have a divergence between the Electoral College and the popular vote. The popular vote loser each time, a Republican, will have won the White house if it happens. It hasn't happened in 100 years before then.

And now it's happened twice. Again, it is this kind of anomalous situation where the Democrats have this growing coalition that's been able to win popular vote of the presidency, but the utter collapse to compete in white working class America has cost her narrow losses.

By the way, she chose not to really defend Wisconsin or Michigan, didn't really go there very much and spend a lot of money, $6 million in Ohio, North Carolina, and Florida and lost all three.

CAMEROTA: Ron, thank you for all of the context this morning and all along the way. We appreciate it.

All right, we have a new president-elect this morning. Let's get to our complete coverage.

We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. You are watching NEW DAY. And we have some stunning news for you if you are just waking up.

Donald Trump will head from Fifth Avenue to Pennsylvania Avenue. He is now president-elect of the United States. President Obama called Donald Trump to congratulate him. The two plan to meet this Thursday. Trump defeating Hillary Clinton. Trump talked about unifying a divided nation last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I've just received a call from Secretary Clinton. She congratulated us. It's about us. And I congratulated her and her family on a very, very hard fought campaign. I mean, she -- she fought very hard.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Hillary Clinton is expected to speak later this morning. As you heard, she did call Donald Trump to concede. Trump right now, 289 electoral votes. We still have three states just too close to call.

Republicans are going to keep control of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The markets, very different reaction. Volatility is the enemy of the market. This was expected to happen if Trump won but not to this degree. However, we're following the futures, and they went very deep. They're turning around.

CAMEROTA: We have the best political team in the business covering it all for you. So let's begin with John Berman, who is going to break down all of the numbers -- John.

CUOMO: JB, they're going to fix your mic and we'll get him right back.