Post Politics Hour

washingtonpost.com's Daily Politics Discussion

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 Congressional reporter Charles Babington was online Wednesday, Aug. 9, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.

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.

____________________

Charles Babington: Good morning, and welcome. I'm filling in today for Chris Cillizza, who is still blogging and Fixing away from Connecticut. Wow, what a night, with Ned Lamont ousting Joe Lieberman in the Dem primary. Already today, Lieberman has filed papers to run as an Independent in Nov., and the Dem Party's top officials have endorsed Lamont and hinted that they'd like Lieberman to step aside.

_______________________

Louisville, Ky: Wow. Ned Lamont upends an 18-year senator in the party primary and can't even get his picture on the front page The Post.

That's kind of weird, don't you think?

Charles Babington: No, I don't think it's weird. When an 18-year Senate veteran (and former VP nominee) gets defeated in his party's primary, that's a huge deal, and the first-day story is mostly about that senator. There will be plenty of time to run more photos and stories about Ned Lamont, but last night's WOW story (and thus this morning's headlines and A1 photos) was Lieberman.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I heard Lieberman talking about the Lamont campaign using "partisan politics", but is it really partisan politics when both candidates are supposed to be in the same party?

Charles Babington: Maybe partisan politics are OK until you lose your party's primary. Then they don't look so great.

_______________________

Baltimore, Md.: I've seen statements from Senators Bayh, Schumer, Reid and Clinton this morning supporting Lamont as the nominee of the Connecticut Democratic Party. Have any members of the Senate Democratic caucus announced their support for Joe Lieberman's independent bid?

Charles Babington: None that I'm aware of.

_______________________

Ontario, Calif.: Charles,

I have a lot of respect this morning for the Democrats in Connecticut and the Republicans in Michigan's 7th District for voting their consciences in defeating the party establishment candidates in their respective primaries. The primary voters in these jurisdictions put their principles - anti-Iraq-war in Connecticut / anti-illegal-immigration in Michigan - ahead of party loyalty. Do you think that we're likely to see a lot more of this independence in the upcoming congressional elections?

Thanks!

Charles Babington: Ontario is referring to yesterday's loss by Rep. Joe Schwarz in the Mich. GOP primary. Schwarz was a party moderate (e.g., pro-choice on abortion), and was defeated by a more conservative Republican. Immigration was a big issue there, but not the only issue. That said, it's rare for incumbents to lose their party's primaries, so I doubt we'll see a lot more of these outcomes in the remaining primaries. But Schwarz's loss illustrates a phenomenon that has made the House so deeply partisan and divided in recent years. Mainly because of gerrymandering by both parties, many House districts are very strongly Republican (i.e. conservative) or strongly Democratic (liberal). The biggest threat to many an incumbent Republican is not from a Dem in the general election, but from a GOP challenger running to his/her right in the primary, when party activists turn out. For Dems, the threat is on the left in a primary. The lesson that many incumbents will take from Schwarz's and Lieberman losses is: The middle ground can treacherous in a primary.

_______________________

Philadelphia, Pa.: Will any national Democrats support Lieberman's independent bid? Would forceful Lamont endorsements from Bill Clinton and Al Gore put an end to this nonsense?

Charles Babington: I suppose some prominent national Dems might endorse Lieberman, but the party's hierarchy -- Sens. Reid, Schumer, Kerry, Clinton, plus Howard Dean and others -- already have endorsed Lamont. I'd be surprised if Bill Clinton endorsed Lieberman (putting him at odds with his wife). And while Gore might feel some residual loyalty to his 2000 running mate, remember, Gore opposed the Iraq invasion from the start. Hard to imagine him endorsing Lieberman over Lamont, given Tuesday's results.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I'm a liberal, and I am very excited about Lamont's win. First, the Democratic party can finally see that a full-throated anti-war, anti-Bush campaign can be successful. Nationwide polls, not just Connecticut's race, shows this view. Maybe the party can finally elaborate a more distinct plan for all Americans to see. Second, it's a sign that incumbents--usually 98% successful--are in greater jeopardy this year. That unfortunate statistic is what keeps all politicians just doing enough to get elected, rather than get good policy made.

Charles Babington: As a liberal, you have every right to feel excited about Lamont's win. Republican activists, meanwhile, already are at work arguing that the Conn. race shows the Democratic Party to be under the control of liberals who will not stand up for national security and fighting terrorism. Whether that message will sell in the purple (i.e., competitive) states, given public sentiment about the Iraq war, may be the main question on which control of the 110th Congress will turn.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: Do you think that there will be any concerted effort by the "democratic establishment"--yes, I know that's a problematic phrase--to convince Lieberman to step aside?

Charles Babington: I do. But given what Lieberman said last night and this morning, it sounds like they won't succeed. At the same time, Dem operatives may not be terribly worried. There seems to be little chance that the GOP candidate in Conn., Alan Schlesinger, can win a three-way race against Lamont and Lieberman. If Lamont wins, the seat stays Democratic. If Lieberman wins as an independent, he almost surely will caucus with the Democrats (as Sen. Jim Jeffords, independent of Vermont, has done for several years). In terms of trying to control the Senate, the outcome is the same.

_______________________

Pickerington, Ohio: Given Lieberman's intention to run as an independent, how likely do you think it is that he will now be frozen out of democratic party politics prior to the November election. Will he, for instance, lose those committee seats assigned by the Democrats in the senate? After all, isn't his announcement to run as an independent simultaneously a renouncing of the democratic party? Is there precedence for this in the past?

Charles Babington: It's a good question, and off hand I don't know the answer. My guess: There are only four weeks of legislative action left on the 109th Congress's calendar, and Lieberman is still a full-fledged senator, so I'd be surprised if his fellow Dems booted him from committees. They would look rather churlish, don't you think?

_______________________

Steamboat Springs, Colo.: Do you think any of the momentum from Lamont's campaign can or will have an effect on the Webb campaign in Va.?

Charles Babington: Steamboat Springs is asking about Democrat James Webb's bid to oust Sen. George Allen (R). Webb is a critic of the Iraq war, and Allen has defended Bush's handling of it. But the similarities with Lamont/Lieberman largely end there. Virginia is much more conservative than Connecticut, for starters. And the Conn. race involved a Democratic primary (in August, no less), in which liberal activists are going to vote in proportionately larger numbers than will be seen in a general election in November. The anti-war sentiment that clearly is growing nationwide is bound to be a concern to Allen and many other Republicans. But he can count on lots of conservatives and GOP-leaning independents to vote in November, and he remains the favorite in the Va. race.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I was wondering whether there will be an exodus from Lieberman's staff in Washington? If I worked for a member of Congress I would not be pleased if they decided to run against the party nominee in the general election. What are your thoughts and what are you hearing? Thanks.

Charles Babington: It's August in Washington. You could swing a dead cat in the House and Senate office buildings and not hit a soul, so it's a bit early to pick up chatter about Lieberman's staff's concerns. In fairness, don't you think their main loyalty will be to their boss and to their family needs (like paying the rent)?

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Do you think losing the support of the Democratic hierarchy will actually hurt Lieberman in running the general election? There are more independents in Connecticut then Democrats and the Republican government currently is way ahead in the polls. I just don't see how Connecticut votes for Rell's reelection and then votes Lieberman out. Can you see a scenario where the same independent and Republican voters sweep both Lieberman and Rell to victory?

Charles Babington: Alexandria makes an excellent point. Conn. Gov. Jodi Rell, a Republican, appears headed toward reelection. And yes, now that Lieberman is running as an independent, his rejection by the likes of Howard Dean and John Kerry will be a badge of honor in the eyes of many independent voters. (Not to mention Republicans who see Schlesinger as having little chance of winning, thus reducing their choice to liberal Lamont or less-liberal Lieberman). Lamont's win (52-48) was narrower than many had expected. I think it's entirely possible for Lieberman to put together a campaign that appeals to (1) the Democrats who supported him Tuesday, (2) the big majority of Conn's independent voters, and (3) some GOP pragmatists who see Lieberman as a lesser evil compared to Lamont. Could that be enough to win a plurality of the votes on Nov. 7? Maybe.

_______________________

Tampa, Fla.: If Lieberman were to win in November as an Independent, would there be anything to stop him from announcing that he was "converting" from an "independent" to a Democrat after the election, thus making his position no different than it is now?

Charles Babington: Nothing at all.

_______________________

Iowa: Can you think of a precedent for this situation in recent national politics where a person defeated in his party's primary immediately announces his plan to run as an independent? Doesn't Lieberman risk coming across as a sore loser who can't accept the verdict of his party's voters?

Charles Babington: He definitely runs that risk. I'm sure some of Lamont's supporters will come right out and say it.

_______________________

Columbia Heights, D.C.: Why has the media so fixated on the differences over Iraq between Lamont and Lieberman when, with the margin such as it was, other issues such as Lieberman's out-of-touch position on judicial nominees such as Judge Alito and his opposition to stem cell research and the whole Terry Schiavo thing seem to have angered Connecticut Democrats just as much. Is it just me or has the MSM gone out of it's way to paint this as a "liberal anti-war blogger" thing when in reality, Lieberman wasn't that popular lately and ran a terrible campaign?

Charles Babington: Lieberman's positions on Schiavo, Alito and other issues did indeed anger some Conn. Democrats. But his position on the war -- and Lamont's strong criticism -- was far and away the biggest issue driving this election. I think the MSM (as you like to say) got it right.

_______________________

Glenside, Pa.: Cynthia McKinney lost her primary, too. Are incumbents having a tough year, in general?

Charles Babington: I would draw no big conclusions from McKinney's defeat in the Ga. Dem primary. She has been a one-person self-wrecking crew for some time. (Remember, this is the second time she has lost a re-election bid in a Democratic primary). First she suggested that President Bush had advance knowledge of the 9-11 attacks, then she slugged a Capitol Police officer. Those are not the "issues" animating many other House campaigns.

_______________________

Denver, Colo.: "The middle ground can treacherous in a primary." I don't think that Joe Lieberman has represented the middle ground when it comes to the Iraq war. He has been to the right of Chuck Hagel and George Will.

Charles Babington: Generally speaking, Lieberman is a classic centrist Democrat.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Right now I'm streaming a radio station out of Denver, and so far the only Senator standing by Lieberman is Ken Salazar of Colorado, and Salazar's constituents are not happy about it. If this is the best that Lieberman can do (who in New England has HEARD of Ken Salazar?), then he should retire quietly now. And there's a lot more to be angry at Lieberman about other than just the war. Such as Schiavo, Medicare, Roberts, Alito, bankruptcy, etc.

Charles Babington: We've touched on some of these topics. Remember, now that Lieberman (overnight, literally) is running as an independent, the rules change. Endorsements by Democratic officials no longer matter. He now is the non-partisan, even anti-partisan candidate, the man who hopes to appeal to voters sick of Washington's partisan wars, voters with no love for the Democratic or Republican establishments.

_______________________

Rochester, N.Y.: I still think that a lot of people are missing what really annoys actual voters about Lieberman: it's that he comes across more Beltway Insider than people's representative. He has seemed more interested in cozying up to Tim Russert than in looking after his own constituents. If I were Joe Biden, I'd be very, very worried about the next time I faced re-election.

Don't you think there is something to this that is being missed? The hostility towards Beltway insiders?

Charles Babington: You may be right. But Joe Biden (D-Del.) has hardly given would-be primary opponents an opening on the Iraq war that Lieberman gave Lamont. In the end, that had a lot more to do with Lieberman's loss than did his appearances on Sunday talk shows.

_______________________

Washington, D.C. by way of CT: My Dad voted in CT (wish I still could!) and he was angered by a number of things - Iraq, Schiavo, Alito - it all added up to voting for Lamont. This is the guy who also voted for Weicker despite being a lifelong Democrat. Conn voters (from my experience being one) can easily vote for a Republican governor and Democratic Senator - it all depends on how they see the different offices wielding power.

Charles Babington: Our writer is alluding to Lowell P. Weicker, a "maverick" or "centrist" Republican who was ousted from the Senate 18 years ago by Lieberman, then won the Conn. governor's race as an independent. Thanks for writing.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: If Lieberman wins in November, given his affinity to Republicans, would he switch to R or caucus with the Rs just to spite the Dems?

Charles Babington: I suppose he might. But I'd be surprised.

_______________________

Dodd's Dilemma: Chris Dodd looks worse right now than Lieberman. He spends all his time talking about his "great friend and colleague" right up until he drops Joe Liebermanlike a hot potato in a desperate bid to seem like a credible presidential candidate. And then people like that decry the cynicism of modern politics.

Charles Babington: How is Dodd any different from Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid or others who campaigned for Lieberman -- as a colleague, friend and incumbent -- but now are endorsing Lamont, not for personal reasons but because he won the Dem. nomination fair and square? Aren't all of these Democrats simply playing by the rules that their party established? Wouldn't Republicans be expected to do the same in a similar situation?

_______________________

Albertville, Ala.: Will the only Republican reaction to Conn. be a continued unthinking support of Bush's Iraq policy, or will some begin to distance themselves from the war for fear of losing in the general election?

Charles Babington: Your guess is as good as mine. Generally speaking, it's rather late for Republicans to change their stripes on the war. Most have cast their lot with Bush, at least through Nov. 7. They can inch a little closer to critiquing the war's prosecution, and talking of the day U.S. troops might withdraw. But going much farther than that might reek of disloyalty and cowardice.

_______________________

Ann Arbor, Mich.: Lieberman didn't lose the primary because he was a centrist. He lost because his centrist claims lost credibility. Just like Connie Morella a few years ago - voters looked at Lieberman and wondered when exactly he planned to stand up. Sure he voted against the Republican majority and the White House - but never when it mattered. His votes and opposition were always followed by absurd appearances on Fox news. As Mr. Miyagi once said, do karate ok, no do karate ok, sort of do karate - squish like grape...Mr. Lieberman was squished like the sour grape that he is.

Charles Babington: I disagree with your analogy to Connie Morella. She was a long-time Republican U.S. House member from a mostly liberal region of Maryland (Montgomery County). She won many elections by opposing her party on some key issues, and by being an excellent politician and campaigner. Finally, the Md. legislature made her district somewhat more Democratic-leaning, and another skilled politician -- Democrat Chris Van Hollen -- defeated her.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Doesn't Lieberman lose out on the fundraising machine that is the DNC now that he is an independent? Does he have enough of a war chest and/or fundraising contacts for the general election?

Charles Babington: Yes to question 1, not sure about Question 2.

_______________________

Not a dichotomy at all: Connecticut and other states can elect Republican governors and Democratic senators for a couple of simple reasons: (1) incumbent senators have a lot of institutionalized strength that makes it hard to beat them under normal circumstances; and (2) Advocacy, as in the Senate, calls for passion, but governing requires competence, and even Democrats know that. (Um, let's not talk about Rowland.)

Charles Babington: Thanks for writing.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: "...voters sick of partisan wars." What percentage of the electorate is actually sick of partisanship? I think those of us who are unhappy with Bush and the Republicans and Lieberman Democrats who support him can't wait for some real partisan Democrats to jump in the ring. So who thinks Democrats should roll over and accommodate the Republicans?

Charles Babington: Lieberman's campaign as an independent will be a good test of your theory.

_______________________

Will Rogers:: "I'm not a member of an organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

I don't care if it was 75 years ago, it's as true now as ever.

Charles Babington: And he never met a man he didn't like. We could use his type today, couldn't we?

_______________________

Raleigh, N.C.: My problem with Lieberman is the sense of entitlement he presents by now running as an independent. If one judges by actions, it seems almost universal among our elected officials in Congress that we "owe" them their positions and that we work for them (instead of the other way around).

Do you think this run might serve to inflame the already strong anti-incumbent sentiment in the country this year?

Charles Babington: I don't think Lieberman will suggest that voters "owe" him anything. He has an 18-year record, and he has the right to present it to the full Conn. electorate (not just the Dem primary voters) to see if they want to send him back to Congress. Remember, they elected Lowell Weicker governor as independent (same with Jesse Ventura in Minn.), and Vermont voters appear likely to elect Bernie Sanders (their independent House member) as an independent senator (replacing independent Jeffords). It's rare , but it happens. Our election laws allow for it, and it's part of our democracy.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: I don't understand why you don't think Lieberman and Lamont could split the liberal/moderate vote and elect the Republican.

Charles Babington: That could happen, but the GOP candidate is weak, and Conn. is one of the most strongly Democratic states.

_______________________

Charles Babington: Thanks for all the excellent questions and comments. Tune in daily at 11 for the Post political chats. cheers.

_______________________

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.