10/10/2016 The Papers


No need to wait until tomorrow morning to see what's in the papers - tune in for a lively and informed conversation about the next day's headlines.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 10/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello, and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be


With me are Fay Schlesinger, Head of News at the Times


and the New York Times reporter Dan Bilefsky.


Let's have a look at some of the front pages. Starting with The


Guardian, it leads what the US presidential debate and the decision


by Paul Ryan the Republican party's most senior elected politician not


to campaign for Donald Trump. The Financial Times said his stance is a


clear signal that Republican leaders have given up hope of Mr Trump


winning the White House. The eye paper reports on a pole that gives


Mrs Clinton a 14 point lead. The Telegraph says the BBC's new


regulator will tell the corporation its falling short in its duty to


reflect modern Britain by failing to put all the women on screen. The


Treasury could lose up to 66 billion pounds a year in tax revenues


according to The Times. One of Britain's biggest exporters is to


quit the business lobby the CBI in protest at its stance against


Brexit, according to The Daily Mail. Lots of talk about Brexit. We are


going to get to that later. First it is The Donald. Six times on the


front page of The Guardian. Grimacing, pouting... A lot of


orange. It very orange man. Now, big Republican figure Paul Ryan. He's


decided he's not going to campaign with Mr Trump and he's not going to


support him. He's not withdrawing his endorsement, interestingly, but


he is saying you are going to lose the White House, I don't care about


you now it's about the house on the Senate. You could argue there's a


sense of rats leaving a sinking ship. He is a big figure, he's been


critical of Trump before. This is not his right-hand man that has


abandoned him but he's a senior figure. I guess it is what people


are saying is his watershed moment of this quite horrible video talking


about grabbing women and treating women as second-class citizens, even


making comments about his own daughter. Paul Ryan said, enough is


enough. He hasn't said I believe others should be leaving him, he's


leaving it to other people. Ryan is saying it's up to you what you


decide. Doing it in that measured way might have more impact. We've


seen others abandon Trump in more dramatic ways. This is quite serious


and I guess there is that growing sense that it is becoming serious.


Dan, practically what does this mean? Does it mean money that might


have gone to Trump from the Republican party is actually now


going to go to other races further down the ticket? Firstly, I think


one has to say this is a huge hammer blow for Trump. When you have the


highest elected Republican official in the land not withdrawing his


support but saying he will not defend Trump, he's effectively


ceding the presidency to Hillary. That's a huge psychological blow


after Trump has had one of the worst weeks in his campaign. In terms of


the financial effect, there was a conference call today between Mr


Ryan and some of his Republican caucus and quite a few hardliners


were defending Trump and lashing out at Ryan for abandoning him at the


11th hour. It's not clear whether there will be a huge migration of


financing at this point. There was some discussion in the last couple


of days. At the end of the day Trump isn't going anywhere and it's too


late in the campaign for that dynamic to change. One can expect


that in recent days with Republicans clawing back their support that they


could be some financial ramifications. A really key question


is whether somebody with political clout like Ryan takes voters with


him or not. We saw it a bit during Brexit in this country and we are


seeing it in the American campaign. This core of voters who support


Trump, a figure has been put at 30% of would-be Republican supporters


who are so dedicated to Trump that the more you criticise him the


harder they dig in. That's what they like. Some of them will be thinking


I say those things at home, I don't really mean them. It's so different


from when we sit in this country looking at America and thinking, how


can somebody think that this tallies with what could be a potential


presidential material? Those are not the people he needs to convince. The


die-hard Trumpists will support him. It did not swing the pendulum. Let's


move to the i Paper. Presidential prospects damaged after the Speaker


of the house says he went campaign. The bottom line is, while they see


the White House has gone, and that means potentially two pics of


Supreme Court justices over the next four years gone to the Republican


side. They are particularly concerned about the Senate going the


way of the Democratic party as well. And that is something that not only


will, as far as legislation is concerned, cause problems for the


Republican party, it means that they cannot get their agenda of the


ground. Yes. Regardless of the outcome of this election now, it's


going to be so fascinating going forward. The way that we will see


America behave going forward. We don't have this division in Britain.


It's a totally different system in the States. In terms of the idea of


a proper hammer blow and looking at the polls, you have now seen an 11%


difference between Clinton and Trump going forward which shows this idea


of a hammer blow might be starting to make the difference. The


prediction seems to be that Trump is going to lose but he's still on the


ballot and as long as he's on the ballot he win. How does he come back


from this, Dan? If you were advising him, what would you say? The thing


is for him to come back... Or is it too late? In the run-up to the


Brexit vote in this country the polls showed Remain ahead and then


we woke up the next morning shocked that Brexit had one. In terms of


Trump changing the rules of the game at this point, he has a particular


personality that has shown itself in new 22 advice and immutable to the


polls. He is who he is. It's hard to see how he could have this kind of


huge cataclysmic metamorphosis with one month left before the ballots. I


find it hard to see unless you give him a lobotomy or shock treatment


that he is going to change in a viable way. That is his attraction


to his core constituency. Whether that's enough to win is a whole


other matter. This type of him bragging about his groping threatens


to energise and decided millennial voters and younger women who might


get off their seats and go and vote because they find the idea of a


Trump presidency anathema. I watched quite a lot of the debate. Hillary


didn't really land any massive blows. It didn't feel obvious that


she had one, in spite of the most horrific video having come out. If


you're turning away from Trump and looking to Clinton for inspiration


it doesn't feel like it's there. That's the problem, isn't it? These


are two of the most unpopular candidates in the history of the


presidency. Hillary is a dreadful candidate, there's no question about


it. She's not a good candidate and she has to have a narrative beyond


not being Trump. We spoke to a lot of undecided voters today including


many women and my impression is that there is such a viscerally strong


reaction among women to his groping and over nasty sexism, and also the


fact American politics has become like a literal mud wrestling reality


game show that is so unpresidential and out of sync with the kind of


decorum of the modern American presidency, that there is a backlash


fermenting among voters and not just Hillary supporters. Some people who


might be in favour of Trump are now thinking maybe this guy isn't so


presidential. There's no doubt people are tired of dynastic


politics, they are tired of the Clintons. She herself has admitted


she's not very effective at connecting with people on a human


level. Anything can happen. Absolutely. The Times, hard Brexit


could cost ?66 billion a year. Just to put this in context, the


projected revenues for Britain for 2016-17 R ?716 billion. It's nearly


one tenth. This is contained in a Treasury document which has been


linked to us. It's what has been given to ministers, when they are


talking about what is Brexit going to look like, this is worse case


scenario. This is the idea we come out of the negotiations, haven't


sorted out any trade deals and go straight onto the WTO tariff. That


is worse case and it probably won't be that bad but they still put the


possibilities from a loss of ?38 billion to ?66 billion a year. That


is the idea we become less attractive for trading, that foreign


investment doesn't come in. We haven't seen all the details but I


think what's interesting in this debate between hard and soft Brexit


is your seeing the dividing lines we saw in the run-up to Brexit and it's


getting a bit nasty. Is this the same document? Yes. They haven't


changed it at all. Does it have more voracity now that it's been leaked


from a Brexit government as opposed to from a Remain government? It's


the same thing. The pro-hard Brexit people, Liam Fox's ilk, will argue


this is scaremongering, this is putting figures out there that are


worst-case scenarios. I think it's starting to... The dividing lines


are rearing their ugly head again. Dan, is this project fear or is this


Project reality? Now that Brexit is, or at least triggering Article 50 is


five months away... My impression is that this country is experiencing a


wake-up call where there was a lot of unreality about the Brexit vote.


May was waffling about her real plan and now the country has woken up to


the fact Brexit is going to happen, the pound has died, prices for


importers are going to go up. Prices of goods are going to go up for


consumers, unemployment could increase and suddenly thinking the


future economy is not looking so rosy. There is go straight onto The


Daily Mail. JCB tycoon quits anti-Brexit CBI. One of Britain's


biggest exporters is to quit the CBI in protest at its stance against


Brexit. The CBI is saying it's going to cost us a lot of money, the


Treasury is backing that but this man is leaving the CBI. This is Lord


Bamford, Tory donor and a very pro-Brexit in the run-up to Brexit.


He wrote all his workers in the run-up to say we should be voting


Brexit, Brexit is the way this country will succeed. It's not that


surprising that his company would quit the CBI. The CBI in The Times


this morning, we had an interview with the head of the CBI saying the


proposal from the Home Secretary last week on foreign workers, this


is the idea businesses would have to identify foreign workers, it was a


terrible policy, divisive. Almost a suggestion of it being racist and


anti-business. Again this is dividing lines and you can feel, The


Daily Mail was a paperback came out for Brexit, and you can feel there


is a drive of saying we need to put our foot down, we need to have the


Brexit that we really wanted which was outside the single market. The


Times was Remain. Yes. It's clear from that headline! It's great to


see you both. Thank you for joining us.


Don't forget all the front pages are online on the BBC News website


where you can read a detailed review of the papers.


It's all there for you, seven days a week at bbc.co.uk/papers


and you can see us there too, with each night's edition


of The Papers being posted on the page shortly


No need to wait until tomorrow morning to see what's in the papers - tune in for a lively and informed conversation about the next day's headlines.

Download Subtitles