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 chief political reporter Dan Balz was online Monday, Jan. 22, at 11 a.m. ET.

The transcript follows.

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

____________________

Dan Balz: Good morning to everyone. It's been a remarkably busy weekend politically with Sen. Clinton's announcement, Gov. Richardson's announcement, Sen. Brownback's announcement -- well you get the picture. Plus we have a new poll back timed for President Bush's State of the Union address tomorrow night. And then there is Iraq and action brewing on the Hill. Thanks to everyone for joining the conversation.

_______________________

Hillary in '08?: Thank you for taking questions. I've heard snippets of her announcement and frankly found it wanting -- I thought she sounded extremely affected. Do you think this is a result of image consultants trying to make her sound less wooden? Personally I and all of my friends that are Democrats don't really care much for her and don't understand how she keeps winding up as a frontrunner in all the polls. And a few independent voters I know who are middle-aged white males have a visceral response to her name, and it isn't positive! Your thoughts?

Dan Balz: These are all questions that Sen. Clinton will have to deal with right from the start of her campaign, all of which add up to questions about whether she can win a general election. You point to one significant issue, which is the "authenticity" question. Whether because of caution, packaging or a tendency to be reserved because of the battering she has taken over the years, some people wonder who the real Clinton is. Those who know her best describe her in private as funny, lively, etc. But she hasn't always shown that side in public.

As for those who have a visceral reaction to her, that's to be expected. She is a known commodity and for a lot of Americans, not one they are buying. But it's not clear that any politician can survive these long, tough campaigns without a certain percentage of the electorate being turned off.

_______________________

New York: Do you think that a poll wanting the Democrat Congress to lead the war in Iraq is pointless? I mean, does Sen. Kennedy really expect the President to put every military initiative before a vote in Congress? Is this just talk or do Democrats really expect to quarterback this vital war by voting on tactics?

Dan Balz: I don't think it's pointless, but it doesn't mean Democrats in Congress will be dictating Iraq policy. It is another way to measure dissatisfaction with the president's war policies. The fact that, by about 2-1, Americans now trust Democrats over Bush on Iraq is telling. Congress will attempt to steer Bush, but as commander in chief, he has the authority to make decisions about how to run the war. If Democrats in Congress are truly unhappy, they can always vote to cut off funding for the war. But that's a drastic step and one most Democrats are so far unwilling to take.

_______________________

Re: Bush's poll numbers: Bush may not be paying attention to the poll numbers when it comes to Iraq, but surely the Republicans are. What do you hear from that camp on how restless, dissatisfied, split etc. they are? Do you think there come a time, soon after the speech tomorrow night, when a delegation will go to the White House (a la Nixon), and tell the president that his Iraqi policy is damaging the entire GOP?

Dan Balz: I'd keep my eye on the developing action in Congress and see how many Republicans end up signing on to the non-binding resolution expressing dissatisfaction with the new plan to send 21,500 additional troops to Iraq. That will be an early sign. It's notable also that a number of the Senate Republicans who are up for reelection in 2008 are most worried about the administration's strategy.

_______________________

Evanston, Ill.: Hi Dan. Thanks for taking our questions. In light of the president's low polling numbers that came out in your article today on Iraq and his leadership, I was wondering if there were any warning signs on Bush's leadership style when he was initially running for president. After all, the public elected him, so it is our fault too if we overlooked something brought up during the 2000 campaign.

washingtonpost.com: Confidence in Bush Leadership at All-Time Low, Poll Finds (Post, Jan. 22)

Dan Balz: That's a good question and one I've asked myself a lot over the past few years. In many ways, Bush is a different person than he was as governor. In Texas, he worked very well with Democrats in the state legislator. He ran, as you recall, as a compassionate conservative, which was an effort to rebrand his party and avoid the negatives that had built up by the Gingrich Republicans in the House in the late 1990s.

Everyone would stipulate that 9/11 changed the president and we see that more and more. But some of what we now see was there in the past: he can be stubborn, he can be impatient, he manages by delegating and then making decisions, he knows his own mind. But this is something historians will be mulling over for many, many years.

_______________________

Raleigh, N.C.: A couple of quick questions/comments. Front page today has an article stating confidence in Bush declines. We have an economy that's doing great, the stock market is at an all time high, unemployment is low and inflation is under control. We haven't been attacked in 6 years (which is a rare over the past 20 years). Do you believe that the media contributes to the misconception that everything is going poorly? Also, Hillary Clinton has thrown her hat into the ring. I have always viewed her as opportunistic and dishonest. It always seems to be about her. Do you believe that she can overcome the poor image more than half of the country has of her?

Dan Balz: There is one important finding in the poll that may help to explain why, given all you cite, confidence in the president is so low. When asked what is the most important issue facing the country, 48 percent said Iraq. No other issue, including the economy, was in double digits. Iraq simply overwhelms everything else and the president is on the wrong side of public opinion on the war. Whether his new policy will work is quite another question, but Americans prefer a strategy that would begin to withdraw troops, not add them.

As for Sen. Clinton, yes there are many people who don't like her, but as I mentioned earlier, that is to be expected, given the high-profile life she has led the past 15 or so years. The debate over whether she can be elected, given those high negatives, will be a main subtext of the 2008 campaign.

_______________________

Richmond, Va.: The Post, in its continuing liberal-P.C. obsession with gender and race, is deliberately exaggerating Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the White House (in yesterday's Post article). You know very well that few men will vote for her, and many women already do not like her from the Clinton years (because of her unladylike obsession with power).

Because typically almost half the eligible voting-age population does not actually vote, in a Presidential election with Hillary running waves of men (especially out in the country) will be sure to get to the polls to keep her out of office. But you will not know this until after Election Day, because these men will not publicly reveal their position against her before then (because it is not considered P.C.-acceptable; the same circumstance would adversely affect Obama too). In the privacy of the voting booth, it will be a different story than what The Post makes out. These men will be sure to put a stop to her feminist-liberalism, about which they never were consulted in the first place.

You reporters and editors at The Post really act like everybody is a San Francisco-New York-Boston liberal. And don't give me that stuff about Hillary having moved to the center. She still will be perceived as a liberal making a calculated decision to move her positions to where she thinks the votes are. And people already see her as strongly cynical and power-motivated (and she also does not project a very warm image on TV). Thank you.

Dan Balz: Thanks for that posting. Our most recent poll showed that she is far more popular among women than men, so she has work to do on one side of the gender gap. Her advisers believe the fact that she is a woman will add energy and enthusiasm to her campaign and that it will be a clear plus in the long run.

_______________________

Chevy Chase, Md.: Brownback? Richardson? Do these guys really think they have a prayer of getting nominated? Is there some other agenda here?

Dan Balz: They know the odds. I spoke with Gov. Richardson briefly yesterday and he's under no illusions about where he starts and how far he has to go. He said he is in the second tier and needs to get into the first and promised to outwork his rivals to get there. He has a long resume that includes service in Congress, US ambassador to the UN, Energy Secretary and now a second-term governor. That's about as impressive as anyone else in the Democratic race. Would he take vice president in the end? Probably. But it's not always easy to run for vice president. It worked for John Edwards in 2004, but only because of how he performed in the early caucuses and primaries.

Some candidates run to highlight an issue or a set of issues, even if they don't think they can get the nomination. Sen. Brownback will be a strong voice in behalf of those who oppose abortion, for example. That could make him an important player in a contest like the Iowa caucuses, if he gains traction.

_______________________

New York: Hi Dan, and thanks for taking questions. I heard an interview this past weekend with a former aide to Dennis Kucinich who charged that the media in 2004 did not cover him adequately because they decided early on that he wasn't a serious candidate. This aide, as well as Kucinich, says that you don't get traction in the polls unless you're covered -- but you don't get coverage unless you get good poll numbers. What do you think about his comments?

Dan Balz: Candidates like Rep. Kucinich often do receive less attention. Their advocates blame us. We tend to take cues from talking to people, whether party officials or rank-and-file activists. Kucinich will say he was right about Iraq and most of the other Democrats were wrong. For some voters, that will be persuasive, but many people who vote in primaries and caucuses in the early states also weigh whether they think a candidate can be elected.

_______________________

Claverack, N.Y.: Would it be wrong to say that the intense early interest in the 2008 race is in one sense an abandonment of the current administration? Like you've given up on the bad book you were reading and started perusing the shelves to find something better?

Dan Balz: There's probably something to that, although as long as this country is in the middle of a war, the incumbent administration will be central to the policy and political debate.

Several factors have contributed to the early start to the 2008 race. One is that the contests on both sides are wide open. There's no sitting vice president poised to be the GOP nominee and even though Sen. Clinton has a lot of assets, there are enough questions about her that a bunch of others have jumped into the Democratic race.

Second, the requirements for fundraising and organizing make it imperative to start early. It takes time to raise $50 million or $80 million or $100,000. Even with the Internet it doesn't happen overnight. Similarly, putting together a national campaign requires a huge organizational challenge.

Third, there is a turning away from this administration and a hunger to get to the next election. I've seen that among Democrats on recent travels to Iowa and New Hampshire, where turnout for candidates like John Edwards and Barack Obama have been far larger than you would expect at this time in the political cycle.

_______________________

Chicago: I'm very impressed by the probable Democratic field for president. What are the chances we will get a real substantive debate about the issues from them as opposed to all of them rolling in the mud together?

Dan Balz: Campaigns are long and tough and inevitably these candidates will clash with one another. There was a little skirmish last week when John Edwards sent a little blast in the direction of Sen. Clinton over the war -- although he later said he wasn't trying to single her out.

But there is reason to hope there will be a substantive debate in both parties. Certainly both parties have important questions to resolve, whether on Iraq or on domestic issues.

Congrats, by the way, on the victory by the Bears.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: Why can't Joe Biden get any traction? He is darned good orator and has been one of the strongest policy voices in the Democratic Party for quite a while now. I'm not a huge supporter or anything, but he certainly seems to have the gravitas to be more than a marginal candidate. I think the big question is whether the press is wagging the dog with Obama-mania and the obviously juicy prospect of the "Take No Prisoners" campaign that the Republicans would wage against Hillary. Your thoughts?

Dan Balz: Sen. Biden is one of several Democrats with long experience and recognized expertise who nonetheless starts this race as a long shot. For someone like Sen. Biden, it's too early to talk about traction. He and others will have to spend much of this year making their case to voters in states like Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina (the states with the earliest contests next year) and hope that over time his message, his personality, his ideas and his political strategy gradually turn heads.

Look at the experience of John Edwards in the last campaign. He languished for most of 2003 and then got hot just before the Iowa caucuses. He didn't win the nomination obviously but he did a lot better than those "experts" who had written him off had said.

The same for Gary Hart in 1984. I will always remember flying back to Washington in a small plane with Hart in the fall of 1983 in which he spent quite a lot of time berating me (and the press generally) for failing to take him more seriously. He predicted he would have a big impact on the nomination battle that year and he turned out to be right.

_______________________

Washington: Looking at the details in the poll this morning shows exactly how unpopular this President is. But even more telling is the answer to the character traits question. The polled population responded 57 percent that "Bush is not honest." How does an unpopular and untrusted president win back the people that have left his train and don't believe what he says?

Dan Balz: Tom Oliphant, who was a columnist for the Boston Globe and is very wise about these things, said this morning on Washington Post Radio that the only think likely to turn around the president's numbers is real progress in Iraq. No amount of presidential rhetoric or White House spin or whatever you want to call it can trump events on the ground. If this new strategy results in a substantial decline in the sectarian violence, if the Iraqi government steps up, if Iraqi security forces show they're capable of securing Baghdad and elsewhere, then the public may look more favorably on the president.

_______________________

Austin, Texas: "In many ways, Bush is a different person than he was as governor. In Texas, he worked very well with Democrats in the state legislator."

Urban legend. As Texas Governor, Bush was happy to allow the entrenched and very powerful Lt. Governor, Bob Bullock, to run the state through legislation and Bullock's catbird seat as the head of the Legislative Budget Board (a quasi-legislative body which has broad discretion in essentially reappropriating funds and micro-managing state agencies.) Bush's only request of the legislature, which was controlled by a coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats, was to give him a tax cut on which to run for President. Otherwise, he was completely disengaged with the legislature.

As with his Democratic predecessor in the presidency, his gubernatorial predecessor had restored fiscal soundness to the state's budget, thus allowing him to reap the political reward of being a "tax cutter" (although it plunged Texas -- and later the federal government -- into an abyss of red ink.) In short Bush let the Texas Legislature do whatever it wanted and ran the state while he prepped for a presidential race. He only "worked well" with the Texas legislature in the sense that he had little interest in or need to work with it at all.

Dan Balz: Thanks for your posting. I agree that Bush's relationship with Bullock was not just valuable but fortuitous and it's also true that Texas Democrats were far more conservative than those in Washington. But I had any number of conversations with Texas legislators and others around Austin about Bush during his gubernatorial days and they described him as someone who, if not engaged in all the details of legislation (he still isn't), nonetheless had charmed many of them during his first legislative session with hands-on attention and that kind of back-slapping personality that he still shows from time to time.

Always good to hear from Austin, one of my favorite cities in the country.

_______________________

Baltimore: Speaking of candidates who run to get a certain viewpoint across but have no chance of winning, do you think we'll see Al Sharpton run at all? He's hysterical at debates.

Dan Balz: The most entertaining debater by far in 2003-2004. I don't know if he'll run.

_______________________

Raleigh, N.C.: I know Bush's SOTU speech won't be all about Iraq, but as a reporter, how do you think the media will cover it? Do you expect the non-Iraq stuff to be covered modestly, barely or not at all? Do you think your readers are interested in anything non-Iraq Bush has to say?

Dan Balz: I suspect Iraq will draw more attention simply because it is the dominant issue of the day. But Bush will be outlining any number of domestic proposals and they will also get attention.

_______________________

Frederick, Md.: I just caught the new online feature Story Conference with you, Chris Cillizza, Peter Baker and Shailagh Murray. Very interesting. The thought occurred to me that, if this new feature continues, you and other Post writers could have four opportunities to "write" the same story -- the original story, the online chat, the Washington Post Radio discussion and now this video discussion. Do you think that a point can be reached where one story can be over-discussed despite the different formats? Or can further clarity be added as the article continues to be dissected? Also, do you feel that the Washington Post is adding so much to your journalistic plate that your core work, reporting and writing, becomes very time-constrained? Answer freely -- There's probably nobody important reading this.

washingtonpost.com: Story Conference: Post Reporters Discuss the Issues and People That Shape American Politics (washigntonpost.com, Jan. 19)

Dan Balz: Thanks for noticing the Story Conference video -- the first of many to come. You raise a really good question and the short answer is yes, it is possible to over-talk any of these stories. But the new reality of the news business is that we reach different audiences with different platforms and the more the merrier. We now often do three versions of every story -- take the announcement by Sen. Clinton. We posted a story on our web site Saturday morning about the decision. We had a multi-story package in the Sunday paper. We have had several reporters on Washington Post Radio talking about it. The web videos provide a different way to get at some of the same questions.

The big challenge is to stay fresh, be insightful and not simply repeat the conventional wisdom a hundred times. That is not what we want to do. As you suggest, sometimes having the opportunity to write something for the web ends up making the subsequent newspaper story a little deeper or sharper and the same with radio and television.

_______________________

Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: Will bottom of the barrel poll results do anything for Bush's speech tomorrow night? You know, rev him up; tone him down; keep it short; extra explanation; no effect at all. Will we see the minority of Republicans now popping up and down like Jack in the Box or are we done with that silliness now? And do you get a front row gallery seat or will you be watching it on the ITube with the rest of us? Thanks much.

Dan Balz: The poll won't have any effect on White House speech planning. Everyone around the president knows the political predicament he is in and that's been factored into the decision-making about what he will say. As for how Republicans and Democrats in the chamber respond, let's wait and see. As for me, I'll be watching like most of you. On big speeches like this, it's often better to see it the way the rest of the country sees it.

Thanks to everyone for joining in today. We're out of time but come back tomorrow at the same time when another Post political reporter takes your questions. Also, please check out the newly updated Politics Page on our web site. We're adding new features and have redesigned the page. We hope you like it and come back to it often.

Have a great day.

Dan Balz

_______________________

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.