This is a rush transcript from "Your World," December 27, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TRISH REGAN, HOST: Congress gaveling in, and investors closing out. Not much action in Washington. It was a whole lot of action on the Street. We were all over the place.
Hello, everyone. I am Trish Regan, in for Neil Cavuto. And this is a special edition of "Your World."
You're looking live right now. Let's go to Capitol Hill, where lawmakers are set to gamble in, and at least right now not expected to do much else, as the partial government shutdown enters day six.
Taking a look at stocks here, stocks rallying big time. At one point today, the Dow was down more than 600 points. But at the close, what do you know, we get nice amounts of green, up 255 there as we close out the day.
We're all over this story. We have got Charles Payne looking at why investors started buying. We also have Peter Doocy on what lawmakers are trying to do. And we have Hillary Vaughn on how President Trump is reacting to all of this.
Let's begin with Hillary at the White House.
Take it away, Hillary.
HILLARY VAUGHN, CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Trish, we are getting an update from the White House on this stalemate between Congress and the president over border wall funding.
Press Secretary Sarah Sanders sending this statement to the press, saying: "The administration understands this crisis and made a reasonable, commonsense solution to Democrats five days ago. We have not received a single response. The president and his team stayed in Washington over Christmas, hoping to negotiate a deal that would stop the dangerous crisis on the border."
The statement continues to say: "The Democrats decided to go home. The only rational conclusion is that the Democrat Party is openly choosing to keep our government closed to protect illegal immigrants, rather than the American people."
Now, the president has just seven days to get 10 Senate Democrats on board before the Democrats take control of the House on January 3. Trump saying yesterday he thinks that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is ready to make a deal, but points to Pelosi as the real problem.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Here's the problem we have. We have a problem with the Democrats, because Nancy Pelosi is calling the shots, not Chuck.
And Chuck wants to have this done. I really believe that. So Nancy is calling the shots. And they all know -- look, politically speaking, don't do it for politics. I'm doing nothing for politics. But, politically speaking, people want border security.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VAUGHN: Pelosi says Trump is using scare tactics and mocks the White House for what she says is a shifting message, saying the president called for a wall, and that has since evolved from a wall to a fence, and made a joke that it's now just a beaded curtain along the border.
Both Minority Leaders Pelosi and Schumer also say the shutdown in is hurting the economy, releasing this joint statement, saying -- quote -- "President Trump is plunging the country into chaos. The stock market is tanking and the president is waging a personal war on the Federal Reserve."
But White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett tells me that he is not concerned that a shutdown, even if it lasts for several weeks, would have a long-term impact on the economy. So, as of now, any market volatility that we're seeing is not going to spook the president into striking a hasty compromise over this border wall.
He is fully intending on planning on keeping this shutdown. We heard that from the statement released moments ago from Sanders, that this is his position, and it's here to stick until Democrats get on board -- Trish.
REGAN: All right. That means he needs a lot of money from them.
Let's go right now -- thank you, Hillary -- to Peter Doocy, who's on Capitol Hill with a look at whether or not those Dems are ever going to budge.
Hey there, Peter.
PETER DOOCY, CORRESPONDENT: Trish, I just talked to the Republican conservative House Freedom Caucus leader, Mark Meadows, who said that the lack of progress toward a deal on border wall funding in the last 48 hours has him thinking this could be a very long shutdown.
And that's key, because Mark Meadows is one of the conservatives who talked President Trump into staying firm and not accepting any kind of a spending bill that didn't put a lot of tax money toward a border wall.
And that's consistent with what the number two Democrats in the Senate, Dick Durbin, just said, that there's no end in sight to the shutdown. The minority leader there, Chuck Schumer, is being tasked with finding middle ground with the White House, but so far no meaningful developments.
Across the Capitol, Democrats take over the House in a week. And when they do, that $5 billion in border wall money approved by the House, but tabled by the Senate, it's going to disappear.
So if Republicans are going to take advantage of their majority in the House, they're going to do it with a very, very tight schedule, because Steve Scalise, the majority whip, just sent everybody an e-mail that said no more votes today or tomorrow -- Trish.
REGAN: All right, surprise, surprise.
Well, thank you so much, Peter Doocy.
What a turnaround on Wall Street, right? From down 600 points to, what do you know, up 250, actually 260. That's kind of nice. So what happened? Why the reversal?
We go to FOX Business Network's Charles Payne for a look at why investors were selling, and then why they started buying.
CHARLES PAYNE, HOST: Hey, Trish.
You know what? I'm outside. There is a lot of electricity out here, but you could feel it in the market today. Let's start with how we set up. Obviously, we had the biggest one-point session and history. We gave some of the back at the start of the session.
We got a conference. We got a report on consumer confidence. It was a tale of two reports, current conditions, through the roof. People feel fantastic. That's what's driving this excitement out here. Expectations, though, that plunged. People are worried. They're concerned there are a lot of question marks out there.
So we had this sideways market. And I got to tell you something. People always look for bottoms and things like that. What I will say, for the second consecutive session, buyers emerged at the very point it looked like the market was going to collapse. In fact, you can argue this 900-point reversal to the upside is as impressive as the 1,000-point move yesterday, also keep in mind too, being led by boring stocks, Campbell's Soup, Kimberly-Clark.
Those are the kind of names that led us up today. It wasn't the Amazons of the world. I think that's a good sign for investors, that you know what? There are other places you can put your money, besides those areas, defense contractors also having a very good session.
Also, one more thing, there's a lot of good news out there. In addition to the China meeting, they're going to turn -- they're going to remove tariffs on 700 items. They're going to remove tariffs on almost 100 I.P. items in July. Things are actually happening beneath the surface that don't get a lot of press, may be starting to resonate within the stock market.
REGAN: Well, it should. We have had this divide, if you would, Charles, between, I think, the fundamentals in the economic environment, and then what's happening in the markets.
And so stay with me. I want to discuss that sort of discourse, if you would, or the challenge between those two.
And I'm bringing in market watchers Jonas Max Ferris -- Jonas Max Ferris and Chris Robinson to talk about this disconnect, really, that's been going on.
Guys, today, we get this new report on consumer confidence. We see that it's slipping a little bit. And yet people have had no problem shopping. I mean, Jonas, that report yesterday was really stellar on those strong holiday sales. So what's really going on, in your view?
JONAS MAX FERRIS, CONTRIBUTOR: Trish, in general, you're not going to find any negative signs in the economy that would warrant the stock market being down even 5 percent, leave alone basically 20 percent, which is what it was down very recently, until, incidentally, Trump said buy stocks on Christmas Day, and people started doing it.
You will find a lot of bad signs in foreign markets, in foreign stock markets and economies. And that's part of the problem. But, really, it's been a very long run. And investors got nervous for a lot of reasons. Maybe rates were going up too fast, as the president talked about, and they bailed on stocks. And they're coming back in.
This is very important, because if we go any lower in the market, it probably means we're going to get dragged into the global slowdown that everybody else is in. If we turn around, it will be like various other corrections and even some mini-bear markets that came back with big gains.
So I was buying this week in client accounts. But I'm still concerned it could fall worse. But you see a lot of professional investors coming in with these discounts, looking for deals. It's still a strong economy.
FERRIS: Again, it was a strong economy in 2000. It didn't prevent us from having a big crash either. So, hopefully, this time it won't be like that.
REGAN: Well, that was a little different, though. I mean, in 2000, you had a lot of euphoria over companies that weren't making a cent, and they just kept losing money. I think about all those tech companies where anything you wanted to sell on the Internet suddenly got a crazy enormous valuation.
And that was so basically divorced from the reality of what was going on, in that these companies do at some point need to turn a profit.
I look at the fundamentals today, Chris, and I see a strong economy. I see GDP growing at a very nice clip. I see wages going through 3.1 percent. I see the lowest unemployment rates that we have seen in decades, and the lowest ever for minority communities.
To me, this is all very positive stuff. And so when I see the crazy volatility in the markets, I wonder how much is these algorithms kind of getting ahead of themselves and not having a real human being there to sort of say, hey, wait a second, things are OK. Things are good.
CHRIS ROBINSON, CME TRADER: Yes, but you have to remember that the algorithms, they're -- they're programmed by human beings.
So I think, sometimes, you're starting to see a herd mentality. Certainly, the whole last three months, we saw that. Even throughout 2018, we saw four or five or six -- we had 5, 10, 8 percent moves, up and down up and down.
We really accelerated once the 10 percent correction level failed. And now we have gone down to 20 percent. So it seems the market is trying to find a bottom. But I think a lot of this volatility is exacerbated.
This is not people sitting at home telling -- calling their brokers saying sell. This is definitely being driven by -- it's just the nature of the way things are today. It's computerized trading, speed-of-light trading.
And you get the type of volatility that we have had. But I would watch the percentages. Year to date, if you had gone to sleep New Year's Eve last year, and just woke up today, did the Rip Van Winkle, we're down 8.5, 9 percent.
So I think that's really what people are going to look at when they look at their 401(k)s at the end of the year is, how did we do for the year? And I think that's why you -- we still have a good chance that you see good consumer -- consumer confidence moving forward.
REGAN: Yes, I mean, that's -- that's the question, Charles.
I mean, they're not going to like it when they see that December was the worst on record. But, hey, at least, in these final days, we will we will see how it all shakes out. Right? We have still got a little time left.
But you're seeing a nice rally today. We just showed you earlier the 1,000-point jump, better than 1,000 points, biggest point gain ever that we saw yesterday on the Dow. I mean, that's got to, I think, feed into consumer confidence.
So, consumer confidence, that may have been a blip. How's it going to look a couple weeks from now?
PAYNE: You know, here's the thing, Trish. You mentioned some of the recent historical issues going back to 2000.
I'm saying this is 1987. I'm saying this is Black Monday, the market down 22 percent in one session, down 38 percent from the highs of August of that summer. Everyone's seeing turmoil. And guess what? We went on a tear for a couple of decades. The economy was stronger. The stock market was stronger.
Right now, I can tell you right now, I'm looking at the fundamentals, just like you are. And I feel extremely confident. And I think the American consumer, two-thirds of the economy, their wages are up. They have got better jobs. There's seven million jobs out there. If you don't like the one you have, there's probably one out there paying even more.
There's a lot of ancillary noise out there that's taken an impact on this market. And, by the way, I will also say this. From time to time, markets must be challenged, and, from time to time, they go through these sort of - - this sort of turmoil.
I don't believe the read, though, is recession in 2019. And because of that, I feel really optimistic for the market, but also, more importantly, for the individuals out there in this economy.
REGAN: I agree with you, Charles. I really do.
Let's keep that optimism going. Things are good. Let's celebrate.
PAYNE: All right.
REGAN: And there we go. Good to see you all.
All right, they gaveled in, and now Congress is off, of course, on vacation, until next week. Are lawmakers playing to reopen the government once they're all back in town? We're going to ask one of them about that.
And the surprising demand from Iraqi lawmakers after President Trump's surprise visit to Iraq. They want our troops out. Why? And why that's not going to actually happen, like, anytime soon -- we're on it next.
REGAN: Democrats are going to be taking over the House one week from today. Get ready.
The House and Senate, meanwhile, they're not going to be doing anything until Monday.
So, what is it that Republicans actually can get done going forward, now that they're losing the House, and given that they have all decided to go off on vacation during the only time that they could actually get anything done?
Let's go right now to South Carolina Republican Congressman and member of the House Freedom Caucus Ralph Norman, joining us from Charlotte, North Carolina.
REP. RALPH NORMAN, R-S.C.: Glad to be here, Trish.
REGAN: But I got to ask, when are you going back to Washington and what's going to happen in these last final days, the last final days when you maybe had a shot at getting that wall?
NORMAN: Well, you have heard both sides, Trish.
The Democrats under Pelosi and Schumer have dug in. The president has dug in. The sides are pretty well drawn. I don't see a quick end of this, as Mark Meadows was saying. There's no in between all this.
And I will tell you, the conservatives are dug in on this. This is not something that we're going to, you know, let public opinion or polls dictate. We have got to have our border security. And I think the country wants that. And I think we're going to have to have that.
But, as far as any solution, I think we in for a long haul.
REGAN: So, that means a shutdown, inevitably? I mean, you're willing to - - because, don't forget, there's a lot of political blame, right, that goes around?
And I know you're going to tell me that it's going to go on the shoulders of the Democrats, and I might even agree with that. But they wouldn't. And they would say, sir, that the Republicans are going to get the blame.
And, of course, that's a risk. You got some time, because there's no elections happening for a little while. But are you willing to take that risk, that political risk?
NORMAN: Well, let me -- let me say this, that this transcends politics to me.
And what the Democrats will agree with is, when they had the opportunity to vote on the Goodlatte bill, no votes were for that. When we voted on -- the fund the $5 billion and to give the president permission to -- or the funds to build a wall, we got zero votes.
And so the -- Ms. Pelosi said we didn't have the support to put a bill forward in the House, which we did 217-185, a 32-vote margin. So, we are...
REGAN: Representative, they are failing, though. I mean, they really are, because if you want -- and I think you want, regardless of what side you're on -- meaningful immigration reform, and you're a Democrat who has the opportunity to see this president, this administration, this Congress accomplish that, and you're willing to throw it all away because you don't want enhanced border security?
I mean, it doesn't even really make logical sense.
NORMAN: Well, it doesn't make logical sense for them just to say that -- and not believe -- that it starts with a border.
You call it wall. Call it a fence. Call it whatever you want. We have to have a port of entry that allows for legal immigration. That's what we don't have. And for the -- for the Democrats just to completely reject that, they just don't want any type of security.
And here's what I will say.
REGAN: Well, do you think it's about something bigger, though?
I mean, because, like I said, I mean, you should want the security, right? There's nothing wrong with it. You can have legal or illegal immigration. And we should all want legal immigration.
But I'm wondering, Congressman, if it's about something more. And it's about the very fact that they do not want to see the Republicans and this administration succeed with this issue, because if you guys succeed, guess what? You're going to have a lot of people feel pretty indebted to you, feeling pretty happy that it was the Republicans and Donald Trump that got meaningful immigration reform through and some additional security.
NORMAN: Well, I think it's two things.
I think it's just what you said, Trish. They don't want this president to succeed in anything. So that's some -- that's part of it.
The other part, they just -- I really think they see this as votes and they see this as something that will benefit their party and their power. And think about that. How sad is that?
REGAN: It's very sad.
NORMAN: It's -- they agreed to this, most of the Democrats, after 9/11.
They agreed in 2013. Now, to all of a sudden say they're not doing anything, and to make this about a personality of a president, is sad. And I do think that -- and what I urge constituents who are calling who are upset about the -- not getting a paycheck, which at this time of year is sad, I urge them to get on the phone and call.
If they believe that our security and sovereignty is important, let the congressman know. And, secondly, I would urge the president to get on the bully -- have the bully pulpit and explain why this is so important. He is a great salesman.
NORMAN: And I think this deserves more...
REGAN: Yes, I think Americans know. But I think they know. I think, deep down -- and the fact that the Democrats were once for this issue, now they're suddenly not, you know why they're not, because you're right.
It is about personality. And the fact that he has made this his signature issue is causing them to say, no way, it's never going to happen. Anyway, that is a travesty. And, unfortunately, that is the reality of politics today.
Sir, it is very good to see you. Thank you for joining us.
NORMAN: Thank you, Trish. Appreciate it.
REGAN: All right.
All right, 'tis the season, apparently, to be sick these days. The flu is hitting, and it's hitting Americans really hard, as authorities report widespread activity all across the country right now. Where it is, where it's the worst, and what you need to do right now to protect your family, we're on it for you.
Plus, after President Trump's surprise visit to Iraq to be with our troops, why are Iraqi lawmakers demanding that we withdraw those troops? That's next.
REGAN: After President Trump's surprise visit in Iraq, a surprising demand from lawmakers there in Iraq today.
Lucas Tomlinson is at the Pentagon with the very latest for us.
LUCAS TOMLINSON, CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Trish.
Lawmakers from the party of firebrand Iraqi Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr swiftly condemned the visit.
Muqtada al-Sadr was responsible for killing hundreds of American troops during the Iraq War.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HAKIM AL-ZAMILI, IRAQI PARLIAMENT MEMBER (through translator): It's not up to Trump or his politicians to determine the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq. It's decided by the Iraqi people, Iraqi Parliament, and the Iraqi government.
The Iraqi government should not be a platform or a base for the Americans to settle their accounts, either with the Russians or the Iranians in the region.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TOMLINSON: More than 5,000 thousand U.S. troops would be staying in Iraq to make sure ISIS doesn't rise up again.
He also said the pullout from Syria would be slow.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Very deliberate, very orderly, while maintaining the U.S. presence in Iraq to prevent an ISIS resurgence and to protect U.S. interests, and also to always watch very closely over any potential reformation of ISIS, and also to watch over Iran.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TOMLINSON: U.S. Special Operations forces in Iraq could launch a raid in Syria to kill ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who remains at large.
ISIS still maintains an estimated $400 million war chest, funds that could be used to launch more terrorist attacks on the West. U.S. intelligence officials say Baghdadi is most likely in Syria near the border with Iraq -- Trish.
REGAN: All right, thank you so much, Lucas.
Well, President Trump, everyone, is telling U.S. troops in Iraq that he has no plans to withdraw those troops from the country.
Retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Dan Hampton joins me now.
Colonel Hampton, isn't this a little wild, that he goes over there, sees our troops, has a nice moment with them, and, three seconds later, the Iraqis are saying, we want them gone? I guess it's not entirely wild. I should suspect it in some ways, but it's rather poor timing on their part, no?
RET. COL. DAN HAMPTON, U.S. AIR FORCE: Well, and it's not any coincidence that this comes on the heels of the president's remarks about not being the global policemen anymore, about pulling troops out of Syria.
They're -- they're hedging, Trish. They're looking for a post-United States Middle East, which isn't going to happen. I think his statements are actually kind of laughable from a military standpoint. They need to remember that they have a country because we gave it back to them. And they can make all the demands that they wish, but there isn't anything they can do about it.
If the president of the United States wants our people to stay there and thinks there's a need for them to stay there, then they're going to stay there. And the Iraqis can't do a thing about it.
HAMPTON: That being said...
REGAN: But, look, why would they even not want us there, I have got to ask you, because, look, we're -- as you rightly point out, they have a country because of our help.
I would think they would continue to want that help.
HAMPTON: Well, and you have to separate what you're hearing on TV from the rank-and-file Iraqis, just like it is in this country or any other country.
What you see and hear doesn't necessarily reflect the vast opinion there. The Iraqis that I know, knew personally and spent a lot of time with, were very happy that they were there. You have to remember who this guy is that's talking and who he is kneeling at the feet of, which is the same cleric that we fought against for years in Iraq.
So they're -- it's win-win from their standpoint, because, if for some reason we decided to pull out, then they would claim a moral victory. If we decide to stay, then they can use that as a launching pad for future divisiveness, which means they're going to stir up their people and get them involved and hopefully cause more and more trouble for the forces that are there.
So we have to be careful.
REGAN: Did we make the wrong move getting out of Syria, in your view?
In my view...
REGAN: You support it?
HAMPTON: And I said this -- I said this with Neil last week -- I wouldn't have gotten into Syria.
HAMPTON: Once we were there, it should have been handled a lot differently.
REGAN: But you had ISIS forming. You had that caliphate that we needed to destroy. You wouldn't have been there to begin with?
HAMPTON: No, I would have -- I would have stomped out the caliphate in Iraq. I was there when it formed in Iraq.
And if the post-2003 war had been handled better, then the foundation for ISIS wouldn't have -- wouldn't have -- wouldn't have happened in Iraq. It wouldn't have been allowed to form there.
REGAN: OK. I agree with. But that was Barack Obama's decision to get out of Iraq long before we should have.
And so what do you know. You had ISIS springing up there, and then turning to Syria, where it continued gaining strength. So didn't we owe it to ourselves to make sure that we demolished ISIS before we said, OK, we're going to wipe our hands clean?
HAMPTON: I think, well, you're right to a point. But what I think is a better way to do it would be to do it through proxies, would have been to do it through the Kurds and through the Turks.
There really wasn't much of a reason for us to get personally involved over there. And we really didn't, not on a big scale. There were a lot of airstrikes and special ops folks. But it wasn't like we had a lot of troops on the ground there, which was the right thing to do.
REGAN: I'll tell you, I am glad, though, that that caliphate is gone, because, to me, that was a source of strength for ISIS. And now that it's gone, it hurts them, as it should.
Anyway, I got to leave it there. Thank you so much, Colonel. Good to see you.
HAMPTON: My pleasure.
REGAN: You think Democrats will have too many candidates to choose from in 2020? Why a new poll is suggesting they actually may not have enough.
And nasty weather making a mess of those return trips from grandma's, and the worst may be yet to come -- what you need to know on this weather coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not much of a commute. It's a dead stop right now.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's crazy. Trying to get back home.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: Our D.C. assignment desk just passing this one along. How do you like it?
The Senate session today ran three minutes and 52 seconds. The House session ran two minutes and 42 seconds. And now lawmakers are off until Monday, of course.
See you right here.
REGAN: FOX on top of the weather right now, as Mother Nature bears down on the country, the same storm blanketing parts of New Mexico with heavy snow, now taking on the Midwest.
About one million people are under blizzard warnings in parts of Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, and the Dakotas. Major road closures already reported. You have got wind gusts of up to 60 miles per hour already occurring, severe rain and thunderstorm the main threat to the South, and all of it impacting flights, of course.
FlightAware reporting more than 5,000 delays and more than 700 cancellations so far today.
A new year is coming, and a new poll of Democrats and independents show they're looking for someone new to lead the 2020 pack, given the names you see here, the majority choosing the option of someone entirely new.
Former Vice President Joe Biden coming in a close second. Is this a problem for the party?
Let's go to Fox News political analyst Gianno Caldwell, Catalina magazine publisher Cathy Areu, and The Wall Street Journal's Jillian Melchior.
Good to see you all.
Cathy, you're -- you're on the left.
CATHY AREU, PUBLISHER, CATALINA: Yes.
REGAN: And I'm just wondering if this concerns you at all, that there is no one that people really want, and they all just want someone new?
AREU: No, it's not concerning this early on. We're talking 2020.
But I think everyone has the same message. So no matter if they're 70- something or 40-something, it's going to be anybody but Trump. So the message is going to win. And I think they all going to have the exact same message, because polls show that 20 percent of voters, even Republicans...
REGAN: Yes, I don't think it's this easy. I'm just saying, anybody but Trump, I don't know.
AREU: Anybody but Trump.
REGAN: I'm going to go over to Gianno on that.
GIANNO CALDWELL, POLITICAL ANALYST: That's a losing message.
REGAN: I don't think it's that easy, because you know what?
You guys ran Hillary Clinton. You thought it was going to be a slam dunk, easy peasy, right? But what you learned is that the American people respond to authenticity more than they do to elitism.
REGAN: And so, Gianno, how critical is it for the Democrats, for Cathy's team there, to make sure that they put up someone who's actually relatable?
CALDWELL: This anybody but Trump narrative, I think, is dead in the water.
To be honest, I think what you said is spot on, Trish. They're looking for authenticity. More importantly, they're not looking for establishment. That's why you see such a high percentage of voters who are interested in someone new.
Beto O'Rourke is someone that, according to a poll that was released on Christmas Eve, is someone that that caucus-goers in Iowa are very excited about. He was number one in a poll that came out with CNN and The Des Moines Register. So that's somebody that they're interested in.
I think what Joe Biden's issue is going to be is, he is still the Joe Biden that gaff-filled. He is still the guy who's going to say things that are perhaps inappropriate.
AREU: Oh, like Trump doesn't?
CALDWELL: And, of course, some can say that President Trump has said things. Wait a second.
AREU: Come on. Come on.
REGAN: Let him finish, Cathy. Hang on.
CALDWELL: To Trish's point on authenticity, if Trump said something, he didn't back off on it. He continued to double down on it.
And that's why the American people felt that he was the right candidate for them, because although he was losing business deals, he still doubled down on his message.
REGAN: Jillian, I think -- I think that Gianno is spot on.
I think Biden would have been a real fair race against Donald Trump. Frankly, I think that Hillary Clinton was probably one of the worst people that they could have picked, again, from a lack of personality standpoint.
But you get some others out there. I mean, gosh, Bernie Sanders, I mean, I'm nothing but a red-blooded American capitalist and have no use for this socialism stuff, but at least he's been consistent, right?
JILLIAN MELCHIOR, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Yes.
REGAN: So, voters are like, well, at least he feels one way and he's consecutively, month after month, year after year, felt that way, Jillian.
So, reading into the polls, what I see here is a divide within the Democratic Party. I think we have got on one hand the blue-collar workers, a little bit more moderate. These are the voters that were tempted to vote for Trump or may have voted for Trump.
And then I think, on the other hand, you have got this progressive wing of the party that's really concerned about intersectionality, about the Bernie Sanders sort of policies, socialism.
MELCHIOR: And it will be really interesting to see which one comes out.
REGAN: By the way, intersectionality, I'm so glad you brought that word up again.
REGAN: Do you want to help define it for viewers who are like, wait a second, intersectionality?
So, progressives are obsessed with this idea. It's the most important one. And the idea is basically that there are multiple kinds of oppression. They all interact together.
So, if you're an African-American woman, you're not just facing racism. You're facing sexism. But this plays into smaller and smaller parts of identity politics. And I think it's going to end up fragmenting the Democratic Party.
And, by the way, Cathy, we learned identity politics didn't work in 2016, at least when it comes to women.
AREU: Yes, but what we have learned is that the party needs to unite. So it's divided. But the GOP was divided when Trump was running.
So, at the end of the day, the party needs to unite. So they might seem like socialists over here, and maybe the old-school over there, but at the end of the day, I think Bernie Sanders said it, they're going to unite. And it's the party that's going to beat Trump. No more four years...
REGAN: Bernie Sanders is going to have to go back to school and study economics if he ever thinks that they're going to unite with him.
I certainly hope the Joe Bidens in the world wouldn't unite with the Bernie Sanders, because, if that's the case, then, well, we're heading towards being another Venezuela.
REGAN: All right, I'm going to leave it there.
Thank you so much, guys.
MELCHIOR: Thank you.
REGAN: While you can't control what stocks do, there are other ways that you can protect your money in the new year. Our moneyman is here to help.
And with widespread flu activity reported all across the nation, what you can be doing right now to protect your family. We have the details next.
REGAN: All right, despite today's late-day turnaround -- that was nice, right? A whole lot of investors are actually losing a lot of money as we go into the close to 2018, because it's been a rough couple days.
But there are ways to actually write off some of your losses on your taxes.
And CPA Dan Geltrude is here with some tips on how you can do that and a whole lot more.
Good to see you, Dan.
DANIEL GELTRUDE, GELTRUDE & COMPANY: Good to see you, Trish.
REGAN: All right, so if you lost money in the market this year, how do you save a little?
Let's talk about the capital loss rule. So if you have capital losses, which may have happened after this past month, you're allowed to offset them against your capital gains. If you have more capital losses than capital gains, you get to take an additional $3,000 against ordinary income.
And if you have even more capital losses after that, you have to carry them forward into the future. So that's how it works.
REGAN: OK. Any other tips you can offer?
So, to start with, on medical expenses, you want to try to get those in last minute before the end of the year, because the rules are changing. So we're going to go from 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income to 10 percent. So you need more of them to qualify for a deduction.
Also, the divorce rules are changing. So, alimony is no longer going to be deductible starting in 2019. So, if you're getting divorced, you want to get that in as quickly as possible this year, depending.
GELTRUDE: Or maybe you want to push it to next year.
REGAN: Maybe save the marriage, yes, for financial reasons.
REGAN: What about gifting?
GELTRUDE: So, in gifting, the rules changed. The estate taxes changed. That all ties into how much you can give as a gift during your lifetime, Trish.
So, now, if you're a single person, it's over $11 million, or 22 if you're married. So that's gifting that you could start now, tax-free, to your family members.
REGAN: OK, what about 401(k) contributions?
GELTRUDE: Well, 401(k) is a big one, because it's amazing that people have a matching from their employer, and they still don't maximize how much they put away in their 401(k).
And I also want to give you another tip on that. Our firm does a lot of pension auditing and 401(k) auditing. Make sure you check your statements, that those matching contributions are getting in there, and they're getting in there on time.
You would be surprised how many times that doesn't happen.
REGAN: It is amazing, because it's free money.
GELTRUDE: It is free money. And, sometimes, it doesn't get there. So you have to be careful.
You're responsible to check your statements. And if you see something like that happens, you have to go to H.R. and let them know.
REGAN: All right, let's talk about the market overall right now, because it's been pretty wild, a lot of volatility out there, Dan, and people are getting a little nervous.
Hey, yesterday was great, up better than 1,000, biggest single-point day ever gain. And today was wild, but we ended up in positive territory. Is there anything you can tell them to reassure them as we go into the new year?
GELTRUDE: Well, this is not your father's stock market, as they say. Things are changing.
And this algorithm, computerized trading, Trish, is having a huge impact on the way these markets are just turning wildly up and down. So I think that's something the regulators are going to have to address going forward.
REGAN: That's very interesting.
I mean, I think you're onto something. I have been talking about this for a while, because this volatility is so severe. Now, by the way, percentage wise, it's not as bad as it looks, but you're talking about big swings, very, very big swings. And it's not all being done by human beings.
We had a guest on earlier that said, well, it's human beings that are actually programming these machines. But, at some point, yes, that human being is not there to control it or reprogram it in real time.
GELTRUDE: Well, the good news about the algorithm trading, Trish, is that it takes the emotion out.
But that takes the human factor out to say, some of this stuff is not making sense.
REGAN: I think you need the emotion. Right.
GELTRUDE: So, look, the algorithm -- the algorithms are really getting crazy. They're even programming them now to monitor officials at the Fed to check their tone in their voice, to see if that's giving away anything and how people are going to trade.
So, what's happening is, we're getting away from investing, and we're moving towards trading. There's a big difference between the two.
REGAN: Oh, I agree with you. I really do.
And the fundamentals of this economy are very good right now.
REGAN: And let's hope they stay that way.
GELTRUDE: I agree.
REGAN: Anyway, Daniel, good to see you.
GELTRUDE: Thank you, Trish.
REGAN: Thank you very much.
All right, gifts aren't the only thing that people are going to be exchanging this year. They're also spreading germs. And it's causing a flu outbreak all across the country.
How you can protect your family, we have got that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) REGAN: Holiday cheer not the only thing spreading this time of year. The government now warning that there's a widespread flu, all kinds of activity all across the country.
So, how can you protect yourself and your family? And how is this flu different?
We're asking family physician Jennifer Caudle.
DR. JENNIFER CAUDLE, FAMILY PHYSICIAN: Thank you.
REGAN: All right, so the government's giving this warning. How different is it this year than other years?
CAUDLE: Well, I think, in some ways, this is what we expect in terms -- we know the flu season goes typically from October to May.
And we know that December, January, and February tend to be the height of flu seasons typically. So, in some ways, this is kind of what we -- what we would expect.
But I think what's really important to note is that, in 11 states, including New York City in addition, we're experiencing moderate to high flu activity. And this really should put us on alert. This is time to kind of kick things into high gear.
A few states are especially bad. I understand Colorado and Georgia?
CAUDLE: Right -- and Georgia, yes, have high activity. Another number of states have moderate activity.
So, really, what we're starting to see is this wave of infections kind of taking hold. This is why -- and why we're talking about this is because it's really important for people, if you haven't gotten that flu shot, you got to go out and get that now.
REGAN: Flu shot, ah, exactly.
REGAN: But I was reading, over 40 percent of Americans say, uh-uh, they're not getting a flu shot.
CAUDLE: Oh, yes. No, I...
REGAN: Would you steer them otherwise? Would you recommend they do it?
CAUDLE: Oh, my gosh, yes.
As a family doctor, I recommend the flu shot. Every single day, I'm giving flu shots. And I do believe that number or something similar.
REGAN: What are people so worried about?
CAUDLE: I can believe -- well, the biggest complaint they tell me is that they're afraid that the flu shot will give them the flu.
And, honestly, that's one of the biggest myths out there. I always recommend the CDC.gov for information. The flu shot will not give you the flu. Now, there are some flu vaccines that are not right for certain people. But the shot form won't get you sick.
So for those people who said, well, I got the flu shot years ago, and it made me sicker than I ever was, it wasn't because of the vaccine. And that's really important to keep in mind.
REGAN: Let me ask you this.
REGAN: Because there had been some studies that showed a direct correlation to, say, the swine flu vaccine and actually cases of narcolepsy. This is overseas.
So that's partly why people get fearful, right, about the -- because they're saying, wait a second, I get this, and maybe I ward off the flu for a season, but do I invite other problems, any kind of neurological problems, et cetera?
What do you say to those people that are fearful of something bigger?
So what I'm talking about is the influenza vaccine, the seasonal flu vaccine. And what I would say is, honestly, I have not actually had a patient tell me that they were concerned about either the swine flu or complications of that vaccine.
What people tell me when they're concerned about getting the flu shot -- and, again, this is my personal experience -- I have been in practice for over 10 years. What they tell me is that they're afraid of getting the flu. That's what they tell me.
It's because a lot of times -- you have to remember that it takes two weeks for the flu shot to develop immunity in our body. So if you get that flu shot right now, you still can get sick. And, sometimes, that happens within the two weeks, and people think it's a shot.
There's also coincidental exposure. Remember, just because you feel like you have the flu doesn't mean you actually do. And you might have actually gotten another bug. There's a number of reasons why people feel that way.
REGAN: Can I ask you this?
CAUDLE: Yes. Yes.
REGAN: What is the best time to do it? Because I usually get mine in November. But we're coming up on January. Is it still a good time for people to get their flu shot?
CAUDLE: Well, yes.
And, first of all, I'm so glad you got your flu shot. That's fantastic.
CAUDLE: I always say the earlier the better. Typically, we start offering them actually late summer, early fall.
We want them to be done as early as possible. But you if you haven't gotten the flu shot, it is not too late. Everyone, for the most part, with some exceptions, over the age of 6 months, are generally eligible. You want to check your -- with your doctor about certain conditions.
CAUDLE: But, over six months, you really should be thinking about it and getting it.
REGAN: Signing up. All right, good to see you, Jennifer. Thank you so much.
CAUDLE: Yes. Thank you.
REGAN: Nancy Pelosi responding to the White House on the partial government shutdown, what she's saying, that's next.
REGAN: Is anything going to get done on this border wall, the shutdown fight, before Democrats take the House one week from today?
Chad Pergram is on the Hill. He has the very latest for us.
And, Chad, I'm kind of discouraged here, because they have an opportunity to work a few more days. They have all headed for the hills -- vacation, that is. And we're going to have a different team in charge there in House in seven days.
So where does that leave things?
CHAD PERGRAM, CORRESPONDENT: Right.
Well, everybody right now thinks that this government shutdown is going to run through the new Congress, when Democrats take control a week from today. Now, Sarah Sanders, the White House spokesperson, put out a statement, putting the blame on Democrats, saying that the president stayed in Washington over Christmas ready to work, and they have still not gone back and talked about the offers that the administration made several days ago.
Well, a spokesman for Nancy Pelosi, the incoming speaker of the House, Drew Hammill, shot back just a couple of seconds ago. And I will read you the quote here.
"Democrats have offered Republicans three options to reopen the government that include funding for strong, sensible and effective border security, but not the president's immoral, ineffective and expensive border wall."
Now, just a few minutes ago, the House and Senate met in brief sessions. If you want understand how brief they were, the Senate met for three minutes and 52 seconds, and the House for two minutes and 42 seconds.
Jim McGovern, a Democrat from Massachusetts, tried to get the floor, tried to get recognized to try to pass a bill on the spot to reopen the government. He wasn't recognized, obviously.
We asked Jim McGovern as he came off the floor a few moments ago, what would the plan look like when Democrats take control a week from today? He mentioned, well, that hasn't been worked out yet.
So we don't know if Democrats will try to pass a bill that will find all the bills, the remaining seven bills for the rest of the fiscal year and have everything but the wall money. He mentioned it could add -- have disaster aid here.
But this shutdown is going to probably go through the 1st of the year. Mark Meadows, the Republican congressman from North Carolina, the leader of the Freedom Caucus, said that he was pretty optimistic about 48 hours ago, he said, but we're really going for a long shutdown right now, Trish.
REGAN: All right.
So I guess the big question is, ultimately, where does this go? And if the shutdown is going to ever end, it means the president has to get $5 billion for his wall. It feels -- and I have said this before -- like a bad game of chicken and who's going to blink first.
Any guesstimates on that, Chad?
PERGRAM: Right, something has to give.
Now, a couple of things that often happen, you get into these government shutdowns, and then you start to have the telephone lines ring. I talked to a couple of aides today. And they said they were hearing some calls, not many, from people who were for the shutdown, people opposed.
But once members get back to Washington -- there's a skeleton crew right now -- and you get protesters outside and the phone lines start to light up and people aren't getting paid, it goes into the next pay period, that's when this starts to get real.
By the same token -- and this is a little bit of what the Republicans are telegraphing their strategy -- they know that Nancy Pelosi is toxic, she is unpopular, and that they can cast this on her and say, well, wait a minute, she's in charge now, she bears part of the blame.
That's a good strategy for Republicans come January. And they might be willing to wait this out into the new year and have Nancy Pelosi go tete-a- tete with the president of the United States.
Well, that may indeed happen. We will find out very soon.
Chad Pergram, thank you very, very much.
PERGRAM: My pleasure.
REGAN: I want to mention right now that we have a big interview coming up on "Trish Regan Primetime" in prime time at 8:00 p.m. this evening. And that is with the vice president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodriguez. She works under Maduro, Nicolas Maduro.
And there's been a lot of difficulty there in Venezuela. In fact, your average Venezuelan has lost more than 20 pounds in the last year. And it's because they don't have access to food.
We have seen video exclusive to our program where people are looting food trucks, and they're rioting in the streets because they don't have their basic necessities.
Meanwhile, you got Vladimir Putin down there right now. He's just purchased an island right there next to Caracas, about 100 miles away from Caracas, which could easily serve as some kind of launch pad. So we don't like that.
He's also just invested in oil fields there, buying up five of them in cash. So, why are the Venezuelans doing business with Putin? Why are they doing business with the Chinese, the Iranians, all of our enemies? Does that need to change?
We're going to talk about all of this. You should tune in tonight for my exclusive interview with the vice president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodriguez, 8:00 p.m. Eastern on the FOX Business Network.
I will see you there.
"The Five" starts now.
Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, Inc. Copyright CQ-2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.