Ruth Marcus
Washington Post Columnist
Wednesday, February 6, 2008; 1:00 PM

Washington Post opinion columnist Ruth Marcus was online Wednesday, Feb. 6 at 1 p.m. ET to discuss her recent columns and the latest news.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Ruth Marcus: Hi everyone. What a long and interesting night. I wrote a column about the experience of reading things on paper versus online -- which makes an online chat an odd way to discuss it, or maybe a fitting one -- but I'm certainly as obsessed with politics as anyone this morning.

_______________________

Big Lake, Alaska: After watching the Senate debate the "stimulus package" and how broke the U.S. Citizens are, I would like to know if they (Congress) are willing to give up their raises this year and to forgo the rebate? The ones they gave themselves knowing our economy was going down? Thank you.

Ruth Marcus: I'm not certain but I did think there was a move in the Senate to exclude lawmakers from the rebates. Pretty gimmicky, I think.

_______________________

New Orleans: Is there a rational explanation as to why Rush Limbaugh is given so much credence? Really, who really cares what this loud mouth says? The media seem to be giving him power.

washingtonpost.com: Limbaugh on McCain: It's Better to Be Right All the Time (Post, Feb. 5)

Ruth Marcus: Yes, the rational explanation is that he has huge numbers of listeners. I will resist the temptation to discuss whether that is rational.

_______________________

Northville, N.Y.: Did you catch the CNN exit poll which found that more than 70 percent of Democrats voting for Clinton would support Obama, and ditto for those voting for Obama if Clinton is nominated? Sounds like a party that's pretty united under the circumstances, no? Wonder how the GOP did.

Ruth Marcus: I'll try to take a look at the GOP polls to see what those say, but in general the Democrats have been much happier with their field of candidates than Republicans this time around, and far more willing to support the opponent of the candidate they support. That said, it could be a long and damaging few weeks (or more), with a lot of bruised feelings that could take away from all that warmth and fuzziness.

_______________________

Yonkers, N.Y.: Wow, did you ever get to sleep? Where's Viguerie; we're not done with him yet! Seriously, how do you break a tie at a convention with two well-funded candidates with about 48 percent each? What's the process look like? And did Edwards blow it by not staying in and collecting some delegates yesterday to give him some clout at the convention?

washingtonpost.com: Discussion Transcript: Analyzing Super Tuesday Returns (washingtonpost.com, Feb. 5)

Ruth Marcus: Thanks for worrying about my shut-eye, really! I dragged home at about 1:30 a.m. last night -- which was probably earlier than a lot of my colleagues -- got up to see the kids off to school and then, I have to admit, crawled back to bed for a bit.

A tie, convention -- the thrill of even thinking about it. The process would look like something I've never seen, but talking about it with political pros, it probably would start with the credentials committee considering challenges to the seating of delegates from Florida and Michigan. It would look like a scramble for superdelegates, with a lot of ambassadorships floating in the air -- and delegates elected for a particular candidate aren't absolutely bound to him or her.

Edwards has some delegates. It might have been hard for him to crack the 15 percent viability threshhold in some of these states yesterday, and when you're out of gas (i.e. cash) you're out of gas.

_______________________

Detroit: Shouldn't Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Campaign be seriously concerned with yesterday's results? Here you have a former First Lady, prominent senator and wife of one of the most popular Democratic presidents, with 150 percent named identification, but Barack Obama continues to win states -- states that Hillary was leading in by double digits not so long ago. Even in the states that Hillary won, Obama was able to cut the deficit from double digits to single digits in a relatively short period of time. It seems the more people get to know Obama, the more thy like him and end up voting for him. I know many Democrats look fondly on the Clinton years, but don't these votes reflect a referendum on the Clinton years? It seems they are choosing the future in Obama, rather than the past in Clinton.

Ruth Marcus: I think they've been concerned seriously for a while, and they posted some important wins in their column last night, especially California. Imagine what we'd be saying about Obama's momentum if he had won there.

_______________________

Cincinnati: Why is the media (except for the New York Times editorial endorsmement) so biased against Hillary Clinton? Female columnists like Maureen Dowd of the New York Times seem to hate her.

Ruth Marcus: You'll have to ask Maureen about her views. As for me, I don't think I'm biased against Hillary Clinton and I don't hate her at all. I've written columns that are critical of her and columns that are supportive; same with editorials.

_______________________

Chicago: Comment: Listening to you and seeing how you segregate the women as to who they vote for and why (i.e. intelligent woman will put their vote to Obama and none intelligent women will vote for Hillary) really baffles me. Apparently you, being considered an intelligent woman, therefore must show partiality toward Obama opposed to Hillary Clinton.

I as a woman strongly disagree with how you think you know how people will vote. Let me say this: People will join the bandwagons and wave their support flags, but once they're behind the curtain of decision votes most definitely can change! I think you should listen to your comments and take a closer look as to how you segregate women. I may be considered (by you) as a woman with no intelligence, but I do know that I want someone in office with "experience," and not "grabbing every Hollywood and famous political person to show how wonderful I am and how I can make a change"!

As a woman you disappoint me how you address women as a whole and how we will vote. Ruth, regarding your comments today on live TV; I've no respect for you -- you've not kept all politics on the up and up. You've not used the color and race to segregate -- you've taken the women of today and degraded us all! Shame on you! I believe all women deserve a public apology. From a woman who cares and knows how to vote!

Ruth Marcus: Hi -- are you the person who e-mailed me about this yesterday? For those who may be baffled, I mentioned on MSNBC that better-educated women tended to be more supportive of Sen. Obama, while less well-educated women more supportive of Sen. Clinton. This was not some kind of value judgment about intelligence -- it was a simple factual restatement of the exit poll data, and last night's exit polls showed a similar gap. Lower-income women and those without college education were more supportive of Clinton. I wasn't predicting how people would vote, just saying what the exit polls indicated.

_______________________

Tora Bora: Why are political pundits so gun shy about relying on exit polls for accurate overall results (Obama supposedly winning Massachusetts last night, Kerry supposedly winning the 2004 election) but then the same pundits accept exit polls as gospel for demographic breakdown of candidate support (Clinton has an overwhelming lead among Hispanics, evangelicals won't vote for Rommey). In other words, why do you see exit polls right on the components but wrong on the results? Thanks.

Ruth Marcus: Really interesting question -- I have to say I've wondered the same a little bit. Certainly relying on polls to predict an outcome that will be known or not within a few hours is a much more dangerous game than relying on polls to try to get a sense of what was underlying support for particular candidates. Among other things, we don't have another mechanism for doing this, so we've got to stick with the polls. That said, I think you have a fair point about not treating them as absolutely right down to the decimal point.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Who are the "superdelegates"? What makes them so "super"? Why doesn't the Democratic Party believe in real democracy instead of allowing a bunch of oligarchs to choose the nominee?

Ruth Marcus: Superdelegates are elected Democratic officials, ex-party poobahs, members of the Democratic National Committee and so on. They account for about 20 percent of Democratic delegates, and they were created after the 1980 election precisely to protect the interests of party insiders. They did the trick for Walter Mondale.

Republicans, by the way, have a way smaller number of these delegates, and they don't use the name.

_______________________

rdco: I have to admit that I have not looked a paper newspaper in years, and always prefer electronic reports to written ones because they can be easily searched for content and "code words." Table 15.1 sounds great, I can't wait to search for it without leaving my desk or spending a small fortune on printing costs.

washingtonpost.com: Worth the Paper It's Printed On (Post, Feb. 6)

Ruth Marcus: Ouch. I really love the paper newspaper, but I also love the search capacity of online and the ability to access information from anywhere.

_______________________

Winnipeg, Canada: This is more a comment than a question. Recently Environics did a poll of 2,001 Canadians, testing their attitudes to a number of world issues. The eye-popper for me was the response to an open-ended question to name a country that was a nagative force in the world. Your country led, with 52 percent of the vote, easily out-distancing Iran with 22 percent and Iraq with 19 percent. Considering that Canadians traditionally have viewed Americans as their best friends and strongest allies in the world, what does that say about what other countries might think of your country? It seems that whoever wins the next election has a large task ahead.

Ruth Marcus: That result is as crazy as it is disturbing. Definitely a large task.

_______________________

xSamplex: Let's see, you talk about a significant document that is available on-line, but don't provide a link. Could this be a writer who time has passed by? Really, that is an error no journalist should make in 2008.

washingtonpost.com: Budget of the United States GovernmentFiscal Year 2009 (Office of Management and Budget)

Ruth Marcus: Sometimes I put hyperlinks in my text myself, and sometimes I don't. I'll ask someone to see if it can be done -- by the way, www.omb.gov -- but an error?

_______________________

Kauai, Hawaii: Re: The possibility of Hillary needing to pick Obama for vice president if she wins the nomination in order to unite the party -- do you think he would accept this if offered?

Ruth Marcus: I'd bet against it -- both her offering and his accepting.

_______________________

Long Beach, Calif.: Obama has mashed the dinasaur Democratic establishment's claimed inevitability, and unmasked the pundits and polls as typically out-of-touch mainstream media mistakes. Now the lead dinasaur, Hillary, is calling on her party insider mole (Alexis Hermanon) on the committee deciding if Hillary's illegal campaigning in Florida and Michigan will be allowed to sway the election.

All the Democrats agreed to stay out of those states, and Hillary broke the plendge and rules to do so. Now she wants the dinasaur establishment to rubberstamp it. Sounds like Rovian-Clintonian politics to me. Can you educate me as to another point of view? Why should her breaking such a pledge be allowed? Thanks.

Ruth Marcus: The Clinton campaign would dispute your claim of "illegal" campaigning -- they stayed out of the Florida until after the voting, and the role of those delegates is still definitely up in the air.

_______________________

Chicago: I was stunned by how many more Democrats than Republicans voted yesterday. In many states, Clinton or Obama alone got more votes than all the GOP candidates combined. What do you make of that? Thanks.

Ruth Marcus: Good news for the fall.

_______________________

jheath53 : Somehow drawing a blank on something to write about in the middle of Primary Season and on the heels of the State of the Union, Marcus decides to use her purchase justification for a hard copy of the U.S. budget as one of her columns! Ruth, get a better topic!

Ruth Marcus: Interesting reaction. I thought about writing about politics but thought I'd try to give everyone a break from that steady diet. Figured there would be plenty of time for politics in the weeks ahead, and that the e-budget was a good opportunity to write about technology. Sorry you disagreed.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Ruth, using your gut feeling, who has the edge in Virginia, Obama or Clinton?

Ruth Marcus: Haven't we learned not to use our gut? Gov. Kaine is backing Obama; that's something of a help, though it didn't do the trick for him in some states (Massachusetts, among others) last night. I think I'm not going to tread any futher out on the limb there without taking a closer look at Virginia demographics and polling.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: Ruth, I will vote for Obama if he gets the nomination or Hillary if she gets the nomination, but I wonder -- will African Americans be so upset if Obama does not get the nomination that they will stay home in November? Will women be so upset if Hillary does not get the nod that they will stay home?

Ruth Marcus: Probably more risk of the former (African Americans staying home) than the latter (women), in part because of the hard feelings on issues of race that have been generated.

_______________________

Bend, Ore.: I've noticed that in polls that break down by religion, about 14 percent profess "none." Since this demographic is larger than either Latinos or blacks, why is it ignored in exit polling while the race is emphasized?

Ruth Marcus: Never thought about it, and I never have heard a pollster discuss it. On a related topic, I had an interesting query from someone about why the exit polls don't ask about evangelicals among Democrats, assuming that only Republicans are evangelicals, which seemed like a fair question too.

_______________________

Warren County, Ohio: With Florida and Michigan unseated, does a candidate need a majority of the remaining seated delegates, or are Floriday and Michigan still counted in the majority threshold number?

Ruth Marcus: A majority of the seated ones. They just lopped the Florida and Michigan delegations off the total number.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: Regarding superdelegates -- I notice some media outlets are including them in the delegate votes ... the difference between Obama and Clinton is less than the number of superdelegates separating them, so I wonder how set in stone a superdelegates' votes are and if it is possible that those numbers will change. How does the media know whom to assign superdelegates to anyway? Do they (the superdelegates) just publicly air whom they will vote for? Thanks.

Ruth Marcus: Set in jello is more like it. There are some surveys of superdelegates and tracking of who has officially declared, but I would not personally include them in my hard delegate count -- they can evaporate with the slightest breeze.

_______________________

tdn0024: Ms. Marcus, you are both right and wrong. The wrong part is more interesting. Apple's iPhone sells zillions not because it is a phone, but because it gives visual and movement happiness like your printed book.

In due time, the tech industry will figure out how to make you happier with an e-version than even with a printed book. It wouldn't be too surprising if the iconoclastic Steve Jobs stewards this. I hope the government holds firm -- just like we want it to with high auto standards. Your complaint is an opportunity for some great entrepreneur to fill ... and lead us all to a better future. Please consider changing the nature of your complaint! (Confession ... I only read your first page.)

Ruth Marcus: Only the first page -- you are proving my point, if I'm allowed to say this online. In-hand, you would have been able to skim to the end to see if it was worth your while -- though it doesn't sound as if you would have thought so.

I'm not technophobic, just a believer that some media are better than others for different tasks.

_______________________

Yonkers, N.Y.: Hate to be a Johnny One-Note here, but did the Democrats outpoll the GOP in several Deep Red States (Georgia for example, though not Utah) yet again? This is a huge talking point for Howard Dean, and especially for Obama -- who got so many voters to the polls -- but jeesh, has this ever happened before? I think we can agree that if the GOP was outpolling the Democrats in Massachusetts and New York it would be a huge headline today. No wonder that Viguerie guy sounded so depressed last night.

Ruth Marcus: I didn't look at the Alaska numbers -- wonder how Democrats did there? Howard Dean has taken a lot of grief for investing resources in states without many Democrats, including Alaska, so it would be interesting to look. I have been struck by the same thing. That's one reason Virginia will be interesting next week -- it's always the tantalizing-but-out-of-grasp Democratic dream.

_______________________

Washington: Ruth, I don't understand how Hillary Clinton essentially can be dismissed as the "establishment" candidate when she is the first viable female candidate for president of the United States in our history. If that isn't change, then I don't know what it is.

Ruth Marcus: Of course it's change. But it's also hard to argue that she is not, especially in comparison with Obama, the establishment candidate, given that she lived for eight years in the very same ... well, establishment ... that she's trying to get back to.

_______________________

Reston, Va.: Ruth, per a lot of news stories out there, McCain has not made a lot of friends in Congress through the years, and the reports say that could hinder him if he were president. Do you know how Clinton or Obama are seen by the other Democrats in Congress? Have either of them stepped on any, and could that come back to haunt them?

Ruth Marcus: I think Sen. Clinton went out of her way to do the workhorse-not-showhorse bit at the start of her first term and earned a lot of respect from her colleagues that way. But there are also some hard feelings, some stretching back to Clinton White House days.

As for Sen. Obama, obviously he had a kind of rock-star start to the Senate, and I'm sure there are a lot of lawmakers who privately had a "who is this upstart" reaction to him. But he also has gotten a lot of backing from his colleagues recently -- including, obviously, the Kennedy stamp of approval.

_______________________

Gainesville, Fla.: I think the issue for a lot of women regarding Hillary is the blatant bias and vitriol shown by the media and columnists against her -- it's more about fairness and equal treatment. They simply do not go after any of the other candidates in the same way. If they were fair in their approaches to all, great, but there is a documented obsession with/gleeful hate toward Clinton (see MediaMatters.org, among others).

That is the piece that disturbs a lot of Democrats, even those of us who lean toward Obama but would be happy with either Clinton or Obama. Actually, sometimes I think the strategic ticket would be Clinton/Obama in 2008 and 2012 with Obama/whomever in 2016 and 2020. Are the campaigns looking at these issues?

Ruth Marcus: I only can answer for my own sins, and gleeful hate (of Clinton, anyway) is not among them.

_______________________

Matthews, N.C.: From what I can see, Democrats turned out at the polls in almost every state by two-tp-one over the Republicans. Is this because more excitement about the presidential election in general? Does it mean anything for November?

Ruth Marcus: More excitement about their candidates among Democrats, and it's good news for them in November, definitely. But I also don't think anyone should take a Democratic win in November for granted. If McCain is the nominee, as he seems destined to be, he has a broad appeal to independents, demonstrated last night.

_______________________

Re: Alaska numbers -- Obama landslide: FYI, Alaska is a landslide for Obama - 75 percent to 25 percent.

Ruth Marcus: Thanks for letting us know.

_______________________

Chevy Chase, Md.: Why Obama will be more competetive against McCain than Hillary: One, he will get out the African American vote, while some may choose to stay home if Hillary is the nominee. Two, he will get some of the independent vote, which she is unlikely to. Three, he will not galvanize the far right wing to "hold their noses" and vote for McCain, which they will do to stop Hillary. Thoughts?

Ruth Marcus: I'd add a corollary to three, which is that that Clinton on the ticket would get some Republicans to the polls who might otherwise have stayed home -- not just holding their noses to vote for McCain but getting off the couch to do it.

That said, the Clinton campaign would argue that she has the demonstrated toughness to stand up against Swift Boat attacks -- no accident that she mentioned that last night -- and it's true that this campaign, which has been pretty mild, is the toughest Obama's been involved in so far.

A few other thoughts: What does the Latino vote do in a McCain-Obama matchup? How does the age/experience factor play out?

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: I always listen to talk radio whenever elections are taking place, so that I can hear different perspectives. The first time I heard conservative radio, it was a pleasant surprise to get that viewpoint, as opposed to what I heard on NPR, TV and the Internet. Rush Limbaugh is informative if you want to know what conservatives are thinking about. He is also entertaining and, I think, very funny.

Ruth Marcus: I listen sometimes when I'm picking up my kids from school to know what he's saying. I'm not sure I'd agree about entertaining, though.

_______________________

Potomac Falls, Va.: Are you surprised that Mark Warner has not endorsed anyone yet (given that "all" of the other Virginia Democrats have)? I would assume it's not because he's hoping to remain a viable vice presidential possibility to both, given that he seems committed to his Senate campaign.

Ruth Marcus: I think he's out of the vice presidential business. Probably not surprising that he hasn't endorsed -- what's to gain when you've got your own race to run, and with one of them at the top of the ticket?

_______________________

Scottsdale, Ariz.: Many people voted early before Edwards and others withdrew. So, what happens to their delegates?

Ruth Marcus: They can follow their consciences, though they might be swayed by an Edwards (or Biden, etc.) admonition to go one way or the other.

_______________________

Orange, Calif. -- Gender Isn't Policy: With respect to the women who say electing a woman is a change -- sure, it's a change in gender. But Obama is a change in how our system operates. This is a huge difference. Obama rejects lobbyists and their money, Hillary is cultivating them. Obama's policy is to unite america, Hillary's is to steamroll those who disagree with her -- just like the neocons do. Obama says it isn't right for the government to garnish wages of those who don't buy health care. Hillary plans to garnish the wages of those who don't and won't say how much the government will take from their paychecks.

Electing a Hillary would be a change in gender -- and that's all. I'd vote for Dianne Feinstein, but I'll vote McCain if Obama is denied his rightful candidacy by the establishment. Gender alone is a disgusting reason to pick a candidate -- it's like being racist.

Ruth Marcus: I'll only take on two pieces of that.

One, on "garnishing wages" -- the biggest policy difference between Clinton and Obama (and there aren't many, so that's not saying much) involves the question of whether there should be a requirement in the health care plan that individuals must purchase insurance (an individual mandate). Obama has this, by the way, for children (parents have to ante up) but not for adults. Obama's advisors on health care have argued that the difference is not that large in reality, and suggested he would consider a mandate if their "make it affordable and people will buy it" plan ends up leaving too many people out. Clinton and other supporters of the individual mandate argue that it is necessary to get to universal coverage because otherwise health care costs will be driven up by free riders on the system. She has not been clear about how she would enforce the mandate, but it is going way too far -- as the Obama campaign has -- to say that she would garnish wages.

No one serious -- certainly not Clinton -- is arguing that she should be elected just because she is a woman, no more than Obama is arguing that he should be elected because he is African American.

_______________________

Washington: Despite many observations that support is trending Obama's way, I find myself moving the opposite way. I was extremely impressed with his articulateness and ideas initially; now I hear comparisons to Kennedy, and Obama's laundry list of "we can do this" and "we can do that" and I find myself thinking "where's the beef?"

Before I was old enough to vote, I worked at the polls handing out Kennedy materials. Later, as a Hill intern, I remember many Democrats observing -- often privately -- that the Kennedy administration had been one more of style than substance. (Mrs. Clinton was correct that it took President Johnson to get civil rights and "Great Society" legislation through Congress.) Much as I would like to see the Country elect a black on principle, I have decided that it is better to go with Clinton, who Hill insiders tell me is a competent and hardworking Senator (and that Obama is less so).

Ruth Marcus: This is an interesting and thoughtful reaction. Wonder if others will start to experience the same.

_______________________

Latino Voters: Will they vote for McCain rather than Obama? Latinos are not voting for African Americans, for whatever reason (I suspect racism but am not sure). Also, McCain has forwarded a "not exactly but sort of" amnesty for illegal aliens, which appeals to Hispanics/Latinos. It has ticked off his usual conservative voters (see his lackluster win in Arizona last night), however.

Ruth Marcus: That's the interesting wrinkle.

Anyway, this time just flew by, and I'm looking forward to coming back in two weeks ... at which point we'll know...?

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over 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.