>> Stephen: YOU LOOK IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS THAT YOU'RE
HAVING FUN.
>> RIGHT, RIGHT.
>> Stephen: IS IT FUN TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES?
>> SOME DAYS.
>> Stephen: YES.
>> SOME DAYS.
IT REALLY IS FUN.
SOME DAYS IT'S JUST VERY HARD WORK, AND YOU DO SO MANY EVENTS,
YOU DO KIND OF LOSE TRACK OF WHERE YOU ARE.
BUT MOST DAYS, SOMETHING HAPPENS DURING THE DAY THAT REALLY MAKES
YOU FEEL LIKE, YES, I KNOW WHY I'M DOING THIS.
I AM SO COMMITTED.
AND IT'S BECAUSE SOMEBODY SAID SOMETHING TO ME ON A ROPE LINE.
>> Stephen: THAT LEADS ME TO MY NEXT QUESTION-- WHY ARE YOU
DOING THIS?
( LAUGHTER ) WHY DO YOU WANT-- THIS IS THE
QUESTION TED KENNEDY COULD NOT ANSWER IN 1979.
WHY DO YOU WANT TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?
>> I WANT TO BE PRESIDENT BECAUSE I WANT TO BUILD ON THE
PROGRESS THAT WE'VE BEEN MAKING AND MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR MORE
PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTRY, PARTICULARLY YOUNG PEOPLE, TO
LIVE UP TO THEIR OWN GOD-GIVEN POTENTIAL.
AND THAT MEANS WE'VE GOT TO GET BACK TO PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES.
WE'VE GOT TO GET BACK TO MAKING THE ECONOMY WORK FOR EVERYBODY.
AND WE HAVE TO DEFEND THE PROGRESS WE'VE MADE IN WOMEN'S
RIGHTS AND GAY RIGHTS AND WE HAVE TO PROTECT VOTING RIGHTS
AND IMMIGRANT RIGHTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
( CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ).
>> Stephen: BUT HOW DO WE DO THAT?
ARE YOU-- THOSE ARE-- YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE NOBLE GOALS AND YOU
ARE THE FIFTH PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE I HAVE HAD ON THE SHOW
SO FAR, AND BERNIE SANDERS WAS SITTING THERE AND HE SAID MANY
OF THE SAME THINGS.
>> UH-HUH.
>> Stephen: AND HIS ANSWERS ARE A DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST
ANSWER.
AND IN THE DEBATE WITH SENATOR SANDERS, YOU SAID THE UNITED
STATES IS NOT DENMARK.
DENMARK HAS THOSE THINGS.
AND THEY HAVE THOSE THINGS WITH HIGH TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS.
>> RIGHT.
>> Stephen: AND HOW WOULD WE ACHIEVE THEM IN THE UNITED
STATES, ASIDE FROM THE POLITICAL PARALYSIS OF WASHINGTON, HOW DO
YOU GET THOSE THINGS?
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WE'VE GOT TO GET BACK TO PUTTING THE
MIDDLE CLASS AT THE CENTER OF OUR POLITICS AND WE'VE GOT TO
MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WHAT HAS BEEN TRIED BY THE REPUBLICANS EVERY
TIME THEY GET A CHANCE, CUTTING TAXES ON THE SUPER WEALTHY,
GETTING OUT OF THE WAY OF CORPORATIONS-- DOESN'T CREATE
BROAD-BASED PROSPERITY.
IT CREATES MORE INEQUALITY.
AND I BELIEVE-- AND I THINK THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS THIS-- THAT
THE ECONOMY DOES BETTER WHEN WE HAVE A DEMOCRAT IN THE WHITE
HOUSE BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TO WORK AGAINST SOME PLETY POWERFUL
FORCES, BUT AT LEAST YOU'RE THERE.
YOU'RE PUCHING BACK ALL THE TIME.
THE MIDDLE CLASS IS ONE OF THE GREAT INVENTIONS OF OUR COUNTRY.
I CAME OUT OF THE MIDDLE CLASS.
MY GRANDFATHER WAS A FACTORY WORKER BUT MY DAD BECAME A SMALL
BUSINESSMAN, AND I KNOW THIS IS POSSIBLE AND MUST EXIST IF
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BELIEVE THAT THIS COUNTRY IS AS GREAT AS I
THINK IT IS.
SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND DO WHAT I KNOW WORKS, BUILD ON WHAT
PRESIDENT OBAMA DID, BECAUSE LOOK AT THE MESS HE INHERITED.
YOU KNOW, I LOVE IT WHEN YOU HAVE REPUBLICANS ON HERE, AND
THEY ACT LIKE WE ALL HAVE AMNESIA.
I MEAN, WE IS IS HAD THE WORST FINANCIAL CRISIS SINCE THE GREAT
DEPRESSION.
AND MY HUSBAND HANDED OVER 23 MILLION NEW JOBS, INCOMES RISING
FOR EVERYBODY, A BALANCED BUDGET AND A SURPLUS, AND PRESIDENT
OBAMA GOT THE WORST ECONOMY WHERE WE WERE LOSING 800,000
JOBS A MONTH.
SO WE'VE GOT TO GET BACK TO MAKING THE MIDDLE CLASS THE
CENTER OF OUR POLITICS, RAISING INCOMES, AND GIVING KIDS A
BETTER SHOT.
( CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ) >> Stephen: THAT'S A CHEAP
TRICK SAYING THINGS PEOPLE LIKE ( LAUGHTER ).
>> WELL, IT WAS THE WAY I WAS RAISE GLD YOU SAID 23 MILLION
JOBS WERE HANDED OVER-- 23 MILLION JOBS WERE--
>> CREATED.
>> Stephen: CREATED UNDER YOUR HUSBAND'S ADMINISTRATION.
THE IMPLICATION OF THAT IS WE GET THE 90s BACK AGAIN IF
YOU'RE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
>> NO.
>> Stephen: DO I HAVE TO WEAR PARACHUTE PANTS AND SLAP
BRACELETS?
ARE WE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO GET JIGY WITH IT?
>> WELL, YOU'D LOOK PRETTY GOOD IN PARACHUTE PANTS.
>> Stephen: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I HAVE THE HIPS FOR IT.
>> I SAW YOU OUT HERE DANCING.
JON, HE'S GOOD.
I REALLY THINK SO.
NO, WE'RE NOT GOING BACK.
>> Stephen: IT'S NOT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION 2.0.
YOU'RE A DIFFERENT PERSON.
>> I'M NOT RUNNING FOR MY HUSBAND'S THIRD TERM.
I'M NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA'S THIRD TERM.
I'M RUNNING FOR MY FIRST TERM BUT I'M GOING TO DO WHAT WORKS
AND WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WORKS.
THE WEALTHY NEED TO PAY MORE.
I'M SORRY TO BREAK IT TO YOU AND, YEAH, I MEAN--
( APPLAUSE ) AND WE NEED --
>> I AM CONFLICTED RECENTLY.
>> YES, I KNOW, I UNDERSTAND.
( LAUGHTER ) AND WE HAVE TO RAISE THE MINIMUM
WAGE.
IT'S A POVERTY WAGE NOW.
IT'S DISGRACEFUL THAT PEOPLE ARE WORKING FULL TIME AND CAN'T GET
OUT OF POVERTY.
WE NEED TO INCENTIVIZE MORE PROFIT SHARING.
WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO REIN IN THE ABUSES IN THE FINANCIAL
SYSTEM, AND PARTICULARLY ON WALL STREET BECAUSE IT DID CONTRIBUTE
TO THE PROBLEMS WE HAD IN THE ECONOMY.
SO ALL OF THAT HAS TO BE DONE.
>> Stephen: YOU PUT FORTH A PLAN.
>> DI.
>> Stephen: FOR REFORMING WALL STREET, AND WALL STREET EMBRACED
IT.
IS THAT A GOOD SIGN?
( LAUGHTER ).
>> WELL, I-- I'M NOT SURE WHO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE I--
I CERTAINLY DIDN'T GET THAT MESSAGE IF THEY DID.
PAUL KRUGMAN, YOU KNOW THE COLUMNIST FOR THE "NEW YORK
TIMES."
>> Stephen: SURE.
>> NOBEL PRIZE-WINNING ECONOMIST SAID I CAME OUT WITH A TOUGH,
COMPREHENSIVE, EFFECTIVE PLAN BECAUSE WHAT I DID, WHICH IS
REALLY LOOKING AT THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE AND TRYING TO
PREEMPT THE PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE IS TO RECOGNIZE THAT, YOU
KNOW, WE DON'T JUST HAVE BIG BANKS IN OUR ECONOMY THAT PULL A
LOT OF STRINGS AND MAKE A LOT OF DECISIONS.
LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED IN '08.
WE HAD A BIG INSURANCE COMPANY THAT HAD TO BE BAILED OUT.
WE HAD AN INVESTMENT BANK, LEHMAN BROTHERS, THAT FAILED.
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND MY PLAN
DOES THAT.
>> Stephen: IF YOU'RE PRESIDENT.
>> YES...
>> Stephen: AND THE BANKS -- AND THE BANKS ARE FAILING, DO WE
LET THEM FAIL THIS TIME?
>> YES, YES.
>> Stephen: WE LET THEM FAIL THIS TIME?
>> YES, YES, YES, YES.
>> Stephen: WOW.
>> FIRST OF ALL, UNDER DODD-FRANK, THAT IS WHAT WILL
HAPPEN, BECAUSE WE NOW HAVE STRESS TESTS AND I'M GOING TO
IMPOSE A RISK FEE ON THE BIG BANK IF THEY-- IF THEY ENGAGE IN
WHAT-- RISKY BEHAVIOR.
BUT THEY HAVE TO KNOW, THEIR EHOLDERS HAVE TO KNOW THAT THAT,
YES, THEY WILL FAIL.
AND IF THEY'RE TOO BIG TO FAIL, THEN UNDER MY PLAN-- AND OTHERS
THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED-- MAY HAVE TO BE BROKEN UP BECAUSE IF
YOU CAN'T MANAGE IT, THEN IT'S MORE LIKELY TO FAIL.
( APPLAUSE ).
>> Stephen: CAN YOU AT LEAST JUST GET BACK FROM THEM THE $3
THEY CHARGE US TO TAKE $20 OUT OF AN A.T.M. MACHINE?
>> YOU KNOW WHAT?
WE NEED TO GO AFTER THAT, TOO, DON'T YOU THINK?
YEAH.
>> Stephen: I DO, DO.
>> YEAH, THAT'S USURRUOUS.
>> Stephen: WHO WOULD YOU RATHER RUN AGAINST, DONALD TRUMP
OR BEN CARSON?
( LAUGHTER ) >> I'M GOING TO LEAVE THAT TO
THE REPUBLICANS.
YOU THINK-- I-- I -- >> THE LIKELY CHOICE IS THOSE
TWO GUYS.
>> BUT IF I SAY ONE OR THE OTHER IT MIGHT INFLUENCE SOME PEOPLE
AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANY INFLUENCE ON IT.
I WANT THEM TO GO THROUGH WHATEVER THEIR PROCESS IS
BECAUSE IF I AM FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE THE NOMINEE, I WANT TO RUN
HARD AGAINST WHICHEVER REPUBLICAN IS UP THERE.
>> Stephen: BUT YOU CAN PICTURE EITHER ONE OF THEM IN
THE OFFICE, RIGHT?
YOU CAN PICTURE EITHER ONE OF THOSE GUYS IN THE OFFICE?
( LAUGHTER ).
>> WELL, I-- I CAN-- I CAN PICTURE THEM IN SOME OFFICE.
( LAUGHTER ) ( APPLAUSE ).