We pass policies to support entrepreneurs while also getting on the road, traveling around the country and trying to build up these regions around the countries. Mark halperin, john heilemann, steve case next. Funding for charlie rose is provided by the following a decisional funding provided by from our studios in new york city, this is captioning sponsored by Rose Communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. Rose it is the eve of the 2014 midterm elections. As americans prepare to go to the polls, Republican Party appeared poised for gains in both house of congress, expected gop wins are likely to push the house of representatives further to the right. But with control of the senate up for grabs, many races there are coming down to the wire. Meanwhile governors in both parties around the country are locked in races dloos to you will ca. Whatever the outcome, the election will have great impact on the ability of congress to legislate and on the expectation of president obamas final two years in office. Here to talk with me now about all of this are Mark Halperin and john heilemann. They are the managing editors of Bloomberg Politics, also the cohost of the new Bloomberg Television program called, with all due respect. And i have great add miration for them. I congratulate them on this very new program. I am thrilled that its in the building right where i work. So i will steam their guests. I will look to them for good ideas it makes it all easy for me, welcome. Thank you, charlie. All right, were on the eve of the election. Give me the big overview. It is going to be a good republican year and there is still doubt whether there will there be a great republican year. They will pick up house seats this he could lose important governor races, if they lost wisconsin or florida, i would give democrats some talking pints and not meaningless talking points. But obviously battle for control of the senate is the big deal. Democrats thought they could hold the senate by doing three things. If they had a superior ground game where they turned out the vote f they focus on the republican candidates rather than a referendum on the president tried to disqualify the republicans, and if they could talk about the economy and suggest the voter have a better idea on the economy. They failed on two of the three. They do have a decent ground game it seems but they have not turned attention on the republicans. They dont have a good record on the economy they are pushing through to voters. Republicans point out this year they have chosen better can dats. They vetted their candidates in the primary process. Republicans wanted as good a ground game as the candidates im not sure they have gotten there. They recruited good can dats. Those candidates stayed on message, avoid avoid the gaffes that hurt republicans in the past and raised sufficient money to be in the game against the president s party. Everybody says this is about obama. That its even more about obama than it is about whoever the republican candidates are. Well, it that is certainly the republican theory. I will say one other thing to add to what he said, not only did they recruit good candidates but those can dats, those established recruited candidates won their primaries which was the big problem in 2010. A lost lost to Tea Party Candidates who ended up being fatally weak. Their ground game is not maybe as good as the democrats but better than if has probably been before. Those are definitely true. Republicans have is out to nationalize this election. Thats what out of power parties do in midterm elections. They try to make it about some big national theme. In 2010 republicans were very successful doing that. In 2016 or 2014 right now, their additional notion was they were going to try to addition that largely has not been the case. Because the law has ended up being after its initial hiccups has now become more or less a lot of republicans still hate the law and asing that to motivate their base voters. Rose whether they can repeal it or whether they want to repeal it. Totally. But its not at the centre. Are you seeing some obamacare adds late in the cycle but it is not the main thin at the end. What is inside at the nationalized not on obamacare but obama. They have gotten lucky or maybe they would say these are things that were destined to happen. But things like ebola which has created a sense of panic and fear among a lot of voters. Obviously a lot of foreign issues, isis and you jane, all the things that happen add broad have given a sense to voters not only of displeasure at president obamas Foreign Policy but generally again a sense of things are kind of out of control. Republicans have is out to capitalize on that. We done know how successfully they have done that until tomorrow night. And there are no doubt that right now, the betting odds favor republicans to retake control of the senate. But there is a plausible path by which democrat kos still hold on to their majority. And its possible most likely we are not even going know the answer until december or january when we see runoffs in louisiana and georgia. If its georgia. If its louisiana. And january if its georgia. It could be runoffs in both and we might not know the answer until then. Lets start with colorado. Its the place if republicans win, it will be the most sort of good news for them in terms of the long erm longerterm place in the party. Beating an incumbent democrat who worked hard to keep his seat who is a good cultural fit. But republicans recruited corey gardner, a house member who has been mod vate moderate in tone and demeanor, staked out some moderate positions. If he wins will get a decent share of the hispanic vote. The governors race as well, a chance to win that, but to take back a senate seat in the Mountain West would mean republicans can put that region back too play. They need to be, to be a national party. They need to do better than they have everywhere outside the south, Mountain West is probably their best bet. How about womens issues which well, i mean i think the press tends to maybe overstate slightly the decree to degree to which republicans have only run, mark udoll has been tagged with focusing exclusively on these issues. There is no doubt, i think. And i think some honest democrat was till there is no doubt they may have overplayed their hand nationally in some of these races trying to run on socalled womens issues. But there is also no doubt that those are issues where there are sharp disagreements with the republicans and if you ask Hillary Clinton as the democratic nominee in 2016 there is no doubt the democrats will return to those issues. I think the problem is you need an economic message along with that. We should say that those states are states in which romney did well, or won there 2012. Well, except in this case, for example. They state that colorado that president o bomba won both in 2008 and 2012. It was relatively close but he won decisively both times around. Rose but he lost in battleground states, governor romney won in 2012. Although those are ones that are generally were republicans are stronger. The really close ones to your point, colorado very, very close. At least the polling looks close now. Iowa, another state where president obama won in 2008 and 20 it and the race was very close. An new hampshire. So youve got plenty of lets talk about iowa. There we have a republican candidate. Who is conservative. Very conservative. There has never been a woman to win statewide. Since the union started. Yeah. Thats not lt. Governor. No governor. She is a very compelling candidate. But the Des Moines Register over the weekend said she was seven or eight points ahead. There is polling subsequently in the last 24 hours that say it is still a 2 point race. The register say partner of hours at Bloomberg Politics and has been the Gold Standard of polling in that state. And so we have a lot of faith in their polling. However, the race had been very, very close up until then and there is now this other polling that shows a two point race. She is a really compelling candidate. He is not a really compelling candidate. And you have a governor in terri brantad who is about to win by a landslide there iowa, a republican governor. And he clearly will have some coat tails it is hard, mark stated t is hard to imagine, a republican governor winning by 15 points as brantad might and have the Republican Senate candidate on the same ballot not come through. It may still happen there are democrats will hold on but there is no doubt she has the advantage going into election. Are they trending in both cases, colorado where there is a democratic senator, incumbent and in iowa where tom harken held the seat for 30 years are. They both trending republicans as far as you can tell. They both moved to a republican advantage. It will take, the interesting thing about those states are those are two states where democrats in the last couple cycles have had their strongest get out the vote operations so if there he is a chance for democrats in those two states and i think they probably need one of them at least to keep the majority t is that the ground game makes the polls kind of irrelevant. Because you remake the electorate just as president obama overperformed his polls to some extent in 2012 because he turned out an electorate different than a lot of pollsters saw turning out. Democrats are hoping they can do that in iowa or colorado. Anyway to get your hands around that and figure out whether they are . Well, you can by asking the campaign sort of plausably where do you get the extra votes from. Who are the pollsters missing. If you are absolutely dominating on the ground in the get out of vote effort, most people think you can make up two, three points at most. But that means that the other sides ground game has to be relatively weak. Democrats, i think, starting to wise up to the notion that republicans arent completely overstating the extent to which they have a stronger get out the vote operation. You look just real quick in those states, you look at the early vote totals which republicans have done quite well, surprisingly well in iowa and colorado. That is one of the things that has democrats more nervous. Although it is true they could make it up on the ground on election day, one of the places where where democrats have done well, is by being a ahead in the early slow. The Republican Party learn anything from the way president obama ran in 2012 and 2008 in terms of the ground game n terms of the way to reach out to new voters, in terms of all of that. Did they learn that. They learn that you need technology. You need modern technology. You need people walking precincts with i phones and i pasd. You need to advertise, not just on broadcast television or cable television. But on health club closed circuit tv and on i phones and everything else. And i they they also learned and you see this in the ernst race. You need candidates worst brand creates some excitement. You need candidates who are good digital, good viral can dats. If muchs got a boring, to pardon the expression 60yearold white man, less likely to reach younger voters, people who live in a digital space. I think you have seen in joany ernst and core gardner and tom coton younger candidates who i think have the capacity to be good digital brands. All men over 60 are not boring. Not all of them. Some. Some are. Go to new hampshire. Because some people are saying that you will have an early result there, 7 30, the polls close at 7 00. And in jean shaheen loses to scott brown that will send shockwaves across the country. You could have no result at 70 clock because the race is too close to call. And that doesnt mean jean will lose t could just be too close for exit polls to model a prediction projection early on. I think jean shaheen in new hampshire, kay hagan in north carolina, two democratic incumbents. Polls close early, but neither has been behind in any public poll since the race start. Never once. So the democrats concede that in both races the republicans have closed it but its going to take a national wave. If jean scheven loses or kay loses, they are going to be the 7th or 8th or 9th democratic seat to fall to the republicans rather than the sixth. Looking at it the way are you thinking about it, if you see those two seats go republican early in the night, you are going to know it will be a big ren can night. Could it be what they call a wave, whatever that is. Well, yes, yeah, whatever metaphor you choose. If those guys the analogy, they will be the canary in the coal mine, those are races that democrats lead all year. If they lose those races these other races are likely to be big republicans put big, a lot of wins on the board with relatively large margins compared to what we expected. The most Expensive Senate race in the country, some say the nasdaq yeast senate race in the country. I got to say, there is stiff competition for that because these races have been really negative and people complain about negativity all the time but this has been a race where across the country one of the commonalities around these races has been very, very, more than usual, i would say, issuefree, very little substance, a lot of personal invective a lot of not just negative, there is always a lot of negative ads but these are particularly substance free. That race, cay hagan has really focused on one issue of real substance which has been education. But the theory of that is that they want to focus on a relationship with the president. And she wants to focus on how they have run the state with respect to education. Yes. Which is of concern. But that is a substantive issue. That say rel thing to be focused on. And to some extent, you know, kay hagan being 99 voting with barack obama all the time is a real issue too. Why is that such a hard issue for people to handle. What is the perfect answer to the republican charge, are you just there for barack obama, are you in fact, you know, barack obama has already said and all the issues that you vote with him in that kind of thing. Isnt there a way to Say Something that will rebut that . Its hard when you voted with the president 98, 99 of the time. You know, the right answer is because of the polarization in washington there is High Pressure for party unity and almost every democrat has voted with the president that frequently. I think the right answer in these times is to point out areas in the past and in the future where you do disagree with the president. Or you dont see eyetoeye with him on every detail. And they try to do that. The reason republicans are doing is it is a hard accusation to answer because as Henry Kissinger would say it has the added advantage of being true. But the case where its most glaring, the case where in alison lunder gren grooims case where she was asked repeatedly whether she voted for the president. No, no not whether she voted with the president but whether she voted for the president. In all these case, in every case she refused to answered question. Did that hurt her, if she simply said yes, and im disappointed. I would have to think on some level the answer is yechlt i think you take a hit either way. She knows barack obama sn unpopular in kentucky, you are going to take a hit however you answer the question. But if you at least figure out a way as mark suggested is i disagree with the president on xyz, a, b and c but if are you asking me whether i voted for him or voted for john mccainnd, i voted for him. But you can say i did vote for the guy who was a big outsourcer, no, i didnt. That is what is happening in georgia. You could have said that about why she doesnt vote for romney. Are you going to take a hit either way. But in this case you take the hit and you look weasle ooechlt i think projecting that kind of weakness and weasliness is never good for any candidate of any party it doesnt come off with. I dont think she benefited from the way she dodged that answer because everyone there knows she voted for obama anyway it is not a secret. Georgia, tell me about Michelle Nunn and david perdue. It is a close race, likely to go into overtime. She is a very strong candidate. He has been hurt late by a lot of advertising in her thursday that he is an outsourcer and proud. Which is the same thing the obama team did with mitt romney. To some extent, thats right. And it doesnt look like either one of them is going to get to 50 . Which means will you get to a runoff in january as we said before. One of them might get over the top tomorrow night but more or less unlikely. Then you have a really interesting case, especially if it turns out that this is the race f it is a close night on tuesday night this is the race that erm dids control of the u. S. Senate. Because in the louisiana case that could be in the same category. But this could be the one it comes down to and then you have a Massive National effort on the part of both parties to go down there. And georgia is a state that is not yet purple but it is one of the most likely states that is trending towards purple and there is a huge Africanamerican Community there. How democrats can get out that investment Michelle Nunn could easily win that race n a runoff, it is totally possible she could do it. Rose because she will get the black vote in addition. She could. Especially if africanamericans are convinced that they will control the u. S. Senate is on the line in january. Mitch mccon nell kentucky against Alison Grimes . You know, he is methodical and he always had the advantage of running in this sixth year of a democratic pit. She has run i think a Better Campaign than some give her credit for. Her huge gaffe notwithstanding about being unwilling to say whether she voted for the president. I suspect that if it is a night filled of crazy upsets on both sides that is the only way colose this at this point. In louisiana we talked about dns only a little bit. The race is likely to go to a runoff. Two republicans sort of splitting the vote. The Republican Party is very confident that they will win in a runoff. They are very confident about that. Its not clear for the reasons we were just discussing which is that the whole focus will change, again if these are if, no doubt in my mind if republicans have al