Should the White House take relief in the president's recent poll numbers? What do you make of Bush's fundraising prowess? Will any of the nine Democratic presidential candidates drop out before the first wave of primaries?
washingtonpost.com Chief Political Correspondent Terry Neal took his Talking Points column live to discuss the latest political news.
Terry Neal
(post.com)
|
|
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
________________________________________________
Terry Neal: We're nearing the end of another interesting week in politics, and this week it was all about money, money, money.
President Bush was scheduled to meet with California Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger today and the speculation is over whether Schwarzenegger would broach the topic of federal aid at this meeting. Schwarzenegger, who won nearly 50 percent of the vote in last week's recall election, has vowed to repeal the tripling of the state's car tax, pushed through this year by Gov. Gray Davis (D).
But Schwarzenegger faces a tough road ahead. Budget analysts are predicting a $12 billion budget shortfall for next year.
Repealing the car tax increase could add another $4 billion to that tab. Republicans are counting on the new governor to resist
any tax increases.
Meanwhile, Democrats are vowing to fight massive budget cuts.
There appear to be no simple solutions. And Schwarzenegger could soon be facing a classic, be-careful-what-you-ask-for
situation. Campaigning is easy. Governing, not so easy.
Here's some interesting background reading:
Complete Washington Post California Recall Coverage
It Won't Be a Chance Encounter (LA Times, Oct. 15)
Bush and Schwarzenegger to Meet in California (New York Times, Oct. 15)
Schwarzenegger gets chance to ask favors of Bush (USA Today, Oct. 16)
Meanwhile, back in Washington, reporters are combing over the latest campaign finance reports for the third quarter and finding
lots of good fodder. President Bush is raising money like no one in history. His success has allowed him to opt out of the federal
financing system and has highlighted the phenomenon of powerhouse individual fund-raising.
With campaign finance reform banning big soft money contributions, expect this type of activity -- where individuals raise large
sums of money from other wealthy people for a candidate -- to become increasingly important. Bush used this technique successfully in
2002, and is off to an even better start this year, with 285 people collecting nearly an amazing $40 million for him this quarter.
Bush Campaign Raises A Record $49.5 Million (Washington Post, Oct. 15)
Democrat Howard Dean is also had a record quarter, raising close to $15 million. None of his competitors came close to that
figure. Most of the other "top tier" candidates were bunched around $4 million each. But some spent more than they raised in the
last quarter, which is likely to lead to questions about whether some candidates are performing under expectation and whether they
should drop out.
Dean Sets Democratic Fund-Raising Record (AP, Oct. 15)
Dean Outpaces Competitors in Fund-Raising and Spending (New York Times, Oct. 16)
Dean May Opt for Private Funding of Primary Run (LA Times, Oct. 16)
So it is amid this backdrop that we begin our conversation today. I'm looking forward to taking your questions. Feel free to ask
about these topics or anything else that's on your mind.
Terry
_______________________
Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Is Clark's camp really is disarray (re. your article today) and will his chances diminish significantly if he doesn't place in the top three in Iowa? (P.S. Could you please explain why a caucus -- not a primary vote -- is considered so important? I can't see how it is.)
washingtonpost.com: Clark Drafters Seek a Spot in His Campaign (Washington Post, Oct. 16)
Terry Neal: I think disarray might be too strong of a word to characterize the state of the campaign right at this minute. I think, as I said in my column today, that the campaign had a very rough start and has been plagued since by infighting over direction. I think they have, just in the last week or so, started to get things in order. And a source of mine told me just today that Clark has sent the word out that he expects the infighting to cease and desist immediately. I think it remains to be seen what the impact of all this will be in the early races. Many campaign have organizational problems early on. Clark simply can't afford that distraction, however, because he got in so late.
To answer you other question, I don't think anyone has said that a caucus vote is more important than a primary vote. What makes Iowa important is its early position on the calendar. There are some different dynamics also to a caucus, because relatively few people actually participate in them. So campaigning in a caucus state focuses even more on energizing key individuals and groups.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
I want to start off by saying first that I am a supporter of Gen. Clark. But, I want to make the prediction that the next serious candidate to drop out of the race will be Senator John Edwards. The reason I say this is because it looks as he has long hit the peak of his fundraising prowess and has only peaked in the polls in South Carolina. I think he may be out of the race before Dec. 1.
Let's then say that Dean takes Iowa (Gephardt drops out), Kerry barely wins New Hampshire, and then Clark takes all the southern states on Feb. 3. That essentially leaves a race between Dean and Clark to see who gets the top slot.
I know most pundits and journalists don't do predictions this early but can you see some validity to my prediction?
washingtonpost.com:
See Edwards' Fund Raising Drops Off (News & Observer, Oct. 16)
Terry Neal: I understand why you might think that, but I seriously doubt Edwards is going to drop out. Here's why: He's moved into a solid lead in South Carolina. So even if he doesn't win Iowa or New Hampshire, he's got a decent chance of winning that other important early bellwether state.
Second, he's already announced that he's not seeking re-election to his Senate seat. He has nothing to lose by staying in and nothing to gain by dropping out. He's still got enough money to run an effective campaign through the end of the year, and he sure isn't going to drop out in January, right before any of the contest begin if he's come that far.
So look, anything could happen. But I'd say it's highly unlikely your prediction comes true.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
So now that Graham is out of the Dem race, are any others poised to drop out too? Given reports that Lieberman, Kerry and Edwards are having a hard time raising as much money as they spend, what's the current speculation on whether any more candidates will drop out before voting starts next year?
Terry Neal: Believe it or not, I'm not hearing lots of speculation about anyone else dropping out. Lieberman, Kerry, Gephardt and Edwards can all make compelling arguments that the race is still competitive and wide-open. Certainly Dean is doing well, but he's not blowing away the field. Sure Clark is at or near the top of the national polls, but he's not doing so hot in the individual state polls that count. And I'd be surprised if any of the bottom tier of candidates -- Sharpton, Kucinich and Moseley Braun -- drop out. They don't have money and they're not doing well in the polls. But they don't need a lot money to run, since their campaigns are as much about making a statement and raising their profiles as about winning.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
If Gephardt, Kerry, and Lieberman are outspending themselves in October, how can they make it to New Hampshire and Iowa in January and February?
washingtonpost.com: 3 Candidates' Spending Tops Funds Raised in Quarter (Washington Post, Oct. 16)
Terry Neal: The question is not whether they are outspending themselves in any one given quarter. The issue is how much money do they have on hand after this quarter versus the task ahead of them. Each of those candidates still have at least $4 million cash on hand, which is plenty of money to stay in the race. Now having said that, each of them needs to perform better in this final quarter, when spending pressures for things like advertising and travel and that sort of thing really pick up. But none of these guys is in a do or die situation just yet.
_______________________
Tampa, Fla.:
The poll numbers showed Bush's approval rating has been dropping since April but your news says his approval went up. I read the article on ABC news based on the same poll. They came to a different conclusion than yours.
The truth hurts doesn't it?
His approval is going down as people find out the truth. Meanwhile you media guys are being used and you don't even seem to know it.
washingtonpost.com: President Rallying Support in Polls (Washington Post, Oct. 15)
Poll: Bush Slipping (ABC News, Oct. 14)
Terry Neal: Everybody's got a conspiracy theory... I guess you are implying that the baddies in "The Media" (or maybe it's just the Washington Post) are cooking the polls in Bush's favor. Okayyyy...Look, the polls are showing a lot of different things right now, some of them contradictory. There have been several polls in the last week or so showing that the president's slide has either stabilized or turned a corner. It is, however, inarguable that the president's numbers are down significantly from a few months ago. But all of this obsessing over polls doesn't matter much right now. The president's poll numbers are going to go up and down. What matters are what those poll numbers are going to look like a year from now. Today's polls don't give much of an indication of how people are going to vote in November 2004. Too much will happen between now and then on Iraq, the economy, health care, etc., to predict whether voters will keep Bush in office of give him the boot next year.
_______________________
Houston, Tex.:
I am a recent convert to Clark from Dean. I see Clark still strong even though the other campaigns have been hitting him. But I think most still don't know how to get at him (besides his Dem. credentials) and some may not want to hit him too hard just in case they need him for the number 2 slot or if he wins the nomination.
With that said, how do you see the race shaping up? I know it is still early but what two campaigns do you say have the momentum to go all the way?
Terry Neal: Hahaha... Now you know I can't answer that!
No, seriously, I will say, and this is not just being diplomatic, I think this race is still pretty wide open. On one hand, you could say Dean is the clear front-runner. But Gephardt is doing well in Iowa. And Edwards is finally starting to register with some voters and is leading in South Carolina. And Kerry is still competitive in Iowa and New Hampshire.
_______________________
New York, N.Y.:
So if you add up all the money the Dems have collected, it's pretty much right up there with Bush, right? So why doesn't anyone mention that? It looks like $36 mil for the Dems and $40 mil for Bush, and that's not taking into account that fact that a lot of people are holding out until the Democratic nominee is a little more clear cut so they don't waste their money. And, the Dems also receive many more smaller donations from a lot more people. It's kind of like saying a movie is the highest grossing movie of all time without taking into consideration that tickets cost $10 now. As far as political donations and tickets go, it's important to look at the total number of people, not the toal amount raised, because that figure is deceptive.
Terry Neal: I think you raise a very good point. Yes, Bush is doing very well, but he's got the entire GOP donor field to himself. While nine Democrats are battling over one donor field. There's no one Democrat on earth who could raise anywhere close to Bush's numbers with that much competition. So in that sense, the Democrats are doing well. And in particular, you've got to look at Dean's success. He has raised a record amount for a Democrat in the third quarter, and he's barely tapped his donor base alone. Almost none of his contributors have given the max $2,000 contribution, which means he can go back to the same people again. Clark's fund-raising is worth noting as well. His operation was only up and running for the last month of the quarter and raised $3.5 million -- about 70 percent of which came from Internet donations. Dean's and Clark's success on the Internet could bode well for Democrats next year when one rather than nine candidates are vying for donor dollars.
_______________________
Louisville, Ky.:
You left Joe Lieberman out of the above characterization. Has he simply not caught on in any one early state, and if not does that really mean his national numbers end up meaning next to nothing? I know you've said that low national numbers don't mean anything if a candidate has a foothold in one of the early states, but does the converse also hold?
Terry Neal: Did I forget Lieberman? My bad...
Well, yes, he's got some issues, shall we say. Lieberman continues to poll well in national polls, which his opponents argue is a function of name recognition more than anything else. In other words, in states where fewer voters are paying close attention, the only name they really recognize is Lieberman's, who was on the ballot in 2000.
Lieberman is focusing on some other, less mentioned early states, such as Arizona, where he could conceivably do well, based on polls. But I think you are correct in that national polling is less important at this stage than key state polling. The nominating process is not a national election per se. And the phenomenon typically is that the national polls eventually start to reflect what is happening in the early states the closer you get to the start of the primary/caucus calendar.
_______________________
Columiba, Md.:
Does Dean have a good chance in New Hampshire? Do his close ties from Vermont help him or hurt him?
washingtonpost.com: Dean Leads Kerry in New Hampshire Poll (Washington Post, Oct. 8)
Terry Neal: To your first question, yes.
To your second, certainly it helps. Name recognition is important. Name recognition can hurt if the name evokes shrieks of horror, but I don't think that's the case among most of New Hampshire's Democratic primary voters. Similarly, I think Kerry, who is running second in NH, has benefited -- certainly more than he's been hurt -- by his state's close ties to NH.
_______________________
Terry Neal: Well, folks, it's been real. But I've really got to run. Let's do it again. Same time, same place, next week.
Terry
_______________________
