Post Politics Hour

Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.

Washington Post national political Jim VandeHei was online Friday, July 7, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest in political news.

Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Jim VandeHei: what I love most about these chats is you, the audience, love to talk about the things we political reporters live for. So while the rest of the world is focused on nuclear showdowns in Iran and North Korea and CNN obsesses about new details of some disrupted NYC terror plot, we will chat about Lamont, Condi and all things 08.

_______________________

New Hampshire: Good morning, Jim and thanks for taking my question.

I watched with interest the Lamont/Lieberman debate. Though Mr. Lamont looked a tad nervous early on, I thought he quickly eliminated that and got down to the issues that matter to democratic voters and made substantive points. Lieberman appeared and sounded petulant and irritable. I thought that his numerous repetitions of Reagan's line-- "there you go again"-- most unbecoming, especially for a supposed Democrat. Joe Lieberman appeared supercilious and he actually made some completely false statements. In short, I think Ned Lamont won the debate. What is your take on the debate and the situation in Conn. in general?

Jim VandeHei: lots of interest in the debate, based on the questions. I missed the first half of the debate so I went to Dan Balz and sassy Shailagh Murray for their take on the exchange and then surveyed a few people I consider smart political minds. I will have the chat master post Murray's terrific story for this morning's paper. It appears Lamont did nothing to hurt his chances of pulling off what would be a huge upset in the upcoming primary. Lieberman also showed the benefits of experience and his ability to shift debating styles. That was not the affable Joe we saw against Cheney in 2000. He was tough, assertive, even dismissive. If Lamont appeared rattled early on, he certainly held his own in the end. I have never considered debates make or break events and they often tend to reinforce preexisting views. But if Lieberman's strategy was to show Lamont was not-ready-for-prime time, or at least not ready to deliver for his state, I doubt the senator accomplished his mission.

_______________________

Jim VandeHei: This is Murray's take via email (the bottom of her after-action report was cut off; sorry).

It was startling to see Lieberman go so negative right away. We haven't seen that side of him in quite a while -- but it's clear why his last tough opponent, Lowell Weicker, loathes him so. Clearly he decided his best approach to the war question was to make Lamont look like a rookie who didn't get the big important stuff. I was also surprised to see him drill away at Lamont's wealth -- in Connecticut no less. Surely the lowest point was when Lieberman complained he had to raise his own campaign millions. If it's true that Connecticut voters are just plain tired of Lieberman -- the hunch lots of people have, including Lieberman backers -- I'm not sure he helped himself all that much. Lamont was a little green and nervous, a fast talker, but he was pretty articulate and didn't look the part of a lefty lunatic.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: In Conn., Lieberman Defends Seat, War Stance , ( Post, July 7 )

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Any thoughts on the Lieberman-Lamont debate and how it will play?

It seemed like a Lieberman win to me. Though Lamont appeared authentic, he also seemed out of his element and way over his head given the format. A lot of stuttering, awkward stares at the camera.

While it probably didn't hurt him, I don't think that Lamont really won any supporters that he didn't already have, which is what he needed in order to make further cuts into Lieberman's lead.

Jim VandeHei: wanted to post pro-Lieberman view from chat participant.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: How would you assess Lieberman's performance last night? I found him to be nearly groveling and a trifle bit pathetic.

I'm not a CT voter, but my girlfriend is--and her entire family seems pretty pro-Lamont. I think last night may have only bolstered their support.

Jim VandeHei: Lieberman is in a box. He represents a left of center state and is running in a primary dominated by liberals. Liberals, generally speaking, hate the war and hate Bush. Lieberman has supported both, arguably with more passion than any other prominent Democrat. The liberal-dominated blogs loathe him and have made his defeat their cause. This is not a position other incumbents envy. That said, polling suggests he holds a double-digit lead, but every Dem I have talked with over the past week said the lead is shrinking and that Lieberman's decision to run as independent if needed is concrete evidence he is very nervous about losing to Lamont. It is the best race in the country right now.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: I saw most of last night's Lamont/Lieberman debate. Lamont seemed well versed on the issues. Lieberman seemed angry and condescending. C-Span showed some of the campaign ads and there was a world of difference in attitude. I don't think Lieberman's sense of entitlement is going to play well in the election.

Jim VandeHei: posting anti-Lieberman view

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: Did you watch Bush on Larry King last night and if so how do you think he did in defending himself on all his positions?

Jim VandeHei: I did watch it. I must confess that if I were a politician the only show I would go on is Larry King. He does not even throw soft balls. they are more like big, colorful beachballs (and if you miss, you get to keep swinging until you hit em). It was newsless and not very interesting. Bush is pretty consistent and King did nothing to probe or press so you should be asking, "why in the heck did you watch it?" boredom, I guess. next time I will listen to my wife and watch that new reality rock band show.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Now that a judge has ruled that DeLay's name will stay on the ballot any chance he'll change his mind and run again?

Jim VandeHei: this could get good. If the ruling is not overturned and Delay's name remains on the ballot, he might have to run. He has not ruled out the idea of running and remember this is a pretty republican district so it is not unfathomable he could make this a competitive race despite his legal problems.

_______________________

Santa Fe, N.M.: Does it ever bother you that Gene Weingarten has a Wikipedia page and you don't? It bothers me. I bet it bothers Weingarten too. You need a fan club.

Jim VandeHei: you need fans to have a fan club. and parents don't count

_______________________

Charleston, S.C.: Jim,

Thanks for the chat. Anti-incumbency seems to be the dominant political force at the moment. First of all, any idea if that will last until at least until the '08 primary season and , secondly, if it does, wouldn't it doom the chances of both Hilary Clinton and John McCain?

Jim VandeHei: I do not think it is fair to say anti-incumbency is the prevailing political force right now. In Utah, Chris Cannon won a competitive primary against a conservative challenger and Lieberman is still up in Conn. There is no doubt voters are restless but the system is rigged to save incumbents. This is the tension to watch as November approaches - in essence, is the system so rigged by redistricting, fundraising and built-in incumbent edges that it can withstand an angry public. I do not know the answer.

As for 08, Sen. Clinton and McCain are, in my mind, the clear frontrunners heading into next year. They have the money, name recognition and experience needed to run and win in presidential elections. But history strongly suggests the landscape will change, new and unexpected candidates will emerge and political reporters will be proven wrong.

_______________________

San Francisco, Calif.: Hello, Mr. VandeHei and thank you for taking my question this morning. President Bush said, on Air Force One to "Stars and Stripes" and on Larry King Live, that he couldn't choose one funeral to attend among all the funerals of the fallen. So he's been to none.

Is this an answer you've heard him give before, or is this a new answer to a tough question, now that there are so many funerals he's not attended?

Jim VandeHei: If my memory serves me right, he has addressed this issue a few times and given the same answer. Bush has been criticized by some for doing too little to honor the dead. On Larry King, he said it would be impossible to pick and chose which funerals to attend. That said, Bush has been changing his style and approach some of late, so maybe this will change as well before the end of his second term.

_______________________

Alpharetta, Ga.: Is there a substantial undecided vote in the Conn. primary or is this about turnout?

Jim VandeHei: not sure. There is always a big chunk of undecideds and I assume there are Democrats who like Lieberman, appreciate his service but disagree with on the war. His challenge is to convince those voters that his overall record should prove more compelling than his view on the war. That is a mighty challenge in this environment.

_______________________

St Peters, Pa.: What about the Santorum race? For months I've heard people saying that the race is going to tighten up but, if anything, Casey's lead seems to be widening. Do you think this race is pretty much a done deal?

Jim VandeHei: All the spin in the world can not change the fact that Santorum, an incumbent, should be more worried than any other sitting senator in America today. He has been down double digits for a longtime and voters are very familiar with him and his policies. He has a lot of money to spend, but GOPers are very nervous about the static nature of the polls.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Just when I thought my party couldn't parody itself any worse, along comes this. If Joe Lieberman ends up running as an "independent Democrat" in the fall, he will be campaigning to defeat the Democrat. Assuming he wins, will he just walk back into the Senate as if nothing happened? And will Charles Schumer high-five him and exclaim, "way to cream that Democrat, Joe"?

Jim VandeHei: great question. He could run as independent and switch parties or he could remain independent and caucus with the Democrats. If the Senate is near a 50-50 split, those democrats who are not endorsing him would probably love to have him back in the hold if he wins as an independent. He certainly has implied he will be a democrat either way.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: On July 4th, Glenn Kessler wrote a dynamic article about Condi Rice, "Defining Her Own Sphere of Influence". My question is, if her job approval ratings remain high (over 50%), and if she remains tied in national polls with Rudy and McCain for the 2008 race, then could the media believe the "draft Condi" effort was successful when she puts her hat in the ring in late 2007? Does her STAR POWER give her the ability to raise enough money to compete in the early states for 2008 or would she still need over $20 million in donations before she could compete?

Jim VandeHei: Obviously, Sec. Rice is one of today's political stars. I still think should will not run for president but wants to be the vice presidential candidate for her party. She is mildly pro-choice, in her own words, which is a deal-killer with many conservative voters. I just don't see how she overcomes the obstacle of her abortion views, which would not be as big of a deal if she were Veep, I think. That said, there is no doubt she is doing everything in power to maximize her exposure and fame and paying very close attention to her public persona. Go back and read's Kessler's piece for evidence.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Defining Her Own Sphere of Influence , ( Post, July 4, 2006 )

_______________________

Burke, Va.: When DOES the '08 season start? Of course now, everyone says it is still to far off to really focus on. But when do the political minds START to focus. When does real campaigning start? After Nov? Spring of next year? Fall of next year? How long does Clinton have to announce her decision before it is too late for her to get into the race. Am I asking to many questions?

Jim VandeHei: It has started but will intensify greatly after the November congressional elections. For political animals, 07 will be amazing. With no obvious heir apparent on either side, I think you will see candidates come out earlier, more strongly and in more unusual ways than in past elections. As a paper, I think we will be providing more coverage much earlier than in the past, and with so many important issues confronting the nation, that is good news for all.

_______________________

Philadelphia, Pa.: There's rationally lower turnout in congressional elections than in presidential elections: how will this affect Dems' chances given the fact that voters such as 18-29 year olds, minorities, and single women tend not to have great turnout.

Jim VandeHei: turnout might seem like a boring topic, but it might the most important one to study for signs of what November may bring. Republicans are better at the ground game, they have been at it longer and seem to have a technological edge. That said, many conservatives are ticked off about the GOP leadership on issues such as spending and could sit home. Democrats appear more motivated but the California 50 special election did not provide any empirical data to suggest that Democrats are prepared to turnout in higher numbers. Watch Connecticut for more clues.

_______________________

Anonymous: Jim. I disagree with your statement that being "mildly pro-choice" is a deal killer with the voters. Maybe with party frontliners, but not the voters.

Given a choice of a Condi Rice vote (or Rudy Giuliani) versus a Hillary Clinton or Kerry, conservatives will vote for Condi Rice.

Jim VandeHei: history suggests otherwise. the modern GOP is very very anti-abortion and made the issue a litmus test.

_______________________

Virginia Beach, Va.: Re: response to Alpharetta-it's not just Lieberman's view on Iraq that accounts for the groundswell of opposition. I have always been an admirer of his and I believe that he is being an advocate for a cause he believes in, which is a good thing. But he seemed to go out of his way to rather parrot the despicable Republican tactic of equating dissent regarding Pres Bush's handling of the war with a lack of patriotism. Democrats are sick of that coming from Republicans, you're not going to find a lot of Democrats who will tolerate it coming from a Democrat. If it made me, a moderate Democrat who believes we have to succeed in Iraq angry, then he's really in trouble.

Jim VandeHei: let the readers speak

_______________________

Anonymous: Sec. Rice is a very enthusiastic backer of Bush's policies, including the war in Iraq. She certainly didn't back Colin Powell's independent (or pseudo-independent) positions. Why would Democrats and independents vote for her as VP, except to make themselves feel better for voting for an African-American women? I thought the article went a bit over the top in stressing "star appeal" over policies and beliefs.

Jim VandeHei: getting a lot of responses similar to this one. There is no doubt that Rice, as a candidate, would carry the Bush baggage, for better or worse. If the war remains unpopular, this would complicate her bid. The same case could be made for McCain. Remember, he has been a very outspoken advocate of the war and defended Bush with vigor, especially starting late last year. The two men have differed on tactics, but McCain is a Bush Republican on the war, as are many other potential candidates.

_______________________

Jim VandeHei: we started early, so I can end early. thanks for your questions and comments and have a great weekend.

_______________________

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. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.