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 reporter Michael D. Shear was online Wednesday, July 16 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest in political news.

The transcript follows.

Get the latest campaign news live on washingtonpost.com's The Trail, or subscribe to the daily Post Politics Podcast.

Archive: Post Politics Hour discussion transcripts

____________________

Michael D. Shear: Good morning everyone. The conventions are just over a month away, and the campaign, like the weather, is getting hot. So let's have at it. Send me your questions about McCain, Obama, Bush, Pelosi or whatever is on your mind.

Mike

_______________________

Tampa, Fla.: I've read that John McCain doesn't use a computer. That's a little surprising, but okay. I was wondering if he uses a Blackberry or e-mails -- it seems like he would have to be able to do that to run a modern campaign, no?

Michael D. Shear: Here's a good question to start us off.

Sen. McCain's comments about just beginning to get online surprised me. I would have thought he spent at least some of his time at a computer.

Having said that, he is not like many politicians I have covered who are tethered to their Blackberries. His preferred method of communication is the cell phone. He has a little flip phone (a Razr, I believe) and he's constantly on it. Many of the images you see of him leaving the plane are of him talking on the phone as he descends the stairs.

_______________________

Chicago: Thanks for taking my question. There have been a lot of polls out recently; they all show Obama with a single-digit lead -- as low as 2 percent and as high as 9 percent. I suppose with their margins of error of 3 percent or 4 percent, these polls all are showing basically the same thing, but does anyone at The Post look at the track record of pollsters to see who is more or less accurate? Can you say which polls are pretty good and which are always off the mark? Is it significant that they all show Obama ahead?

Michael D. Shear: Lots of questions about polls. So let's start with this one.

The general policy at the Post is to largely rely on our own polls, conducted in-house, by our own full-time pollster, Jon Cohen. By doing so, we have full knowledge of the questions asked and do not have to place trust in people or organizations we don't know.

That's not to say that we don't sometimes reference other polls (though, generally only public polls conducted by non-partisan groups or news organizations.) But we rarely write full stories about those other polls. We just don't need to, given the resource we have in Jon.

And yes, polls have track records, and we do take that into consideration when we report about them.

_______________________

Falls Church, Va.: Why is it that when a poll comes out last week showing Obama and McCain statistically tied, the Post ignores it, but when a poll comes out showing Obama with an eight-point lead, that's front-page news? The partisan explanation is obvious, but I'm curious if there's some other spin that nods toward journalistic objectivity.

washingtonpost.com: Obama Leads by 8 Points In Poll (Post, July )

Michael D. Shear: Here's another poll question.

I'm not sure which poll last week you are referring to, Falls Church. As I said in my previous answer, the Post generally does not provide the same kind of coverage to polls from other organizations. I think you would find that news judgment about our own polls is remarkably consistent regardless of what the poll shows. I can't remember a time (I'm sure there have been one or two) when we didn't run our own surveys on the front of our paper.

_______________________

Boston: Michael I know you are at the paper Post, but why oh why is that pointless Jib-Jab thing given such prominence on washingtonpost.com? Will I now be subjected to countless pundits and journalists telling me how witty it is? Because believe me, it wasn't four years ago and it ain't today.

washingtonpost.com: Video: 'Time for Some Campaignin' (washingtonpost.com, July 15)

Michael D. Shear: I haven't watched this one yet Boston, but I gotta say, I thought the first one was hysterical. And I gather a lot of others agreed with me, since they turned it into a phenomenon of sorts.

The question of whether it deserves "such prominence" on the front of the Web site is one of those endless debates. It will be welcomed by some, reviled by others. I'm glad I don't make such decisions.

_______________________

Germantown, Md.: Much has been made about Obama's resume. I see that he was elected to the Illinois State Senate, lost a congressional primary in 2000, won election to the U.S. Senate and was sworn in January of 2005. How far back do we have to go to find a president who had such little federal- or state-level experience? Have we reached the point in popular culture where someone doesn't really need to build their resume in order to be president?

Michael D. Shear: It's a good, and relevant, question Germantown.

But ultimately, it's likely to be one answered on election day by the voters. One person's "necessary experience" is irrelevant to another person. And there's a great debate about what kind of experiences are best to prepare one for what is, probably, a job that is impossible to prepare for.

The same questions have arisen for Supreme Court justices, who are typically lawyers or judges now. But every now and then a career politician is appointed. Is that a good thing? A bad thing? I'm sure that could be answered a lot of different ways.

_______________________

North Dartmouth, Mass.: Mike, is it me or all I get from John McCain military talk? Seems like what Joe Biden said about Rudy Giuliani ... "a noun, a verb and military."

Michael D. Shear: I don't think that's quite fair, North Dartmouth.

I was with Sen. McCain last week, when he spent almost all of his time talking about the economy -- gas prices, oil drilling, the environment, taxes, job growth, small business. Very little time, actually, was spent talking about the military -- and then only when events in Afghanistan and elsewhere sort of forced the issue.

It's certainly true that the McCain campaign believes that military issues play in their favor. And he will no doubt spend a lot of time talking about them.

But my sense is that the worsening economy is forcing the campaign to rethink their strategy a bit, focusing more on domestic issues than the foreign policy ones that they believe work to their own benefit.

_______________________

Gaithersburg, Md.: Given that the majority of home owners are white (75 percent of whites, 46 percent of blacks, 56 percent of American Indians, 53 percent of Asians) according to U.S. Census figures, isn't the housing and mortgage bailout/buyout another example of the lingering white privilege? I'm a liberal who believes in safety nets, but I didn't buy a house I couldn't afford (nor a car, for that matter) and I'm angry that Congress (both parties) is buying votes from the irresponsible middle class. I don't like their using my tax dollars to salvage a housing market I've responsibly not become a part of. So it's not welfare to the Republicans if we're giving billions to corporations they failed to regulate properly?

Michael D. Shear: Gaithersburg's comments are a crystal clear example of why this mortgage crisis is going to be politically dangerous for candidates (and other politicians) during the next few months.

There's no question among many that government has to act to prevent deeper economic chaos from millions of home loan defaults. But by definition, the help ends up going to those who were the most irresponsible -- mortgage companies which offered risky loans and the borrowers who leaped at the chance to get loans they couldn't really afford.

How to balance those two? That may be the trickiest political trick of the season.

_______________________

Pacific Northwest: To Chicago -- here's a site that has tracked the accuracy of the more significant polling organizations.

Michael D. Shear: No endorsement of this site (I haven't seen it yet) but here's a reader's suggestion for those wanting to track the accuracy of various polls.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Michael Shear is having connection problems but will return as soon as possible.

_______________________

Northern Virginia: To Germantown, Md.: Not sure what your question was, but here's a response. You are leaving out a few state elections in your list of Obama's past political experience, but more broadly, elected experience is not the only experience. Sen. McCain's service in the military, and not just as a POW, is relevant to the election decision. Sen. Clinton's experience in the White House and in Arkansas was said to give her 35 years of experience. Mitt Romney literally turned around the Olympics from a bribery scandal embarrassment under the original organizers to a shining success. I always thought that was relevant, too.

In Obama's case you might look at: President of the Harvard Law Review (an absolute top academic achievement), community organizing, teaching constitutional law at Chicago, registering more than 100,000 new voters in Illinois to help put Bill Clinton over the top, two monumental best-sellers, and more. As for elected experience, you might compare his record to Abraham Lincoln's, also of Illinois.

Michael D. Shear: Sorry guys. Working on a flaky AirCard connection. Bear with me.

Here's one person's thoughts about experience.

_______________________

Boston (again): Okay the 2004 Jib-Jab did give me a mild chuckle, but the endless media fascination with that was overwhelming. This one has pretty decent graphics, but the writers need to find an editor!

Michael D. Shear: The truth comes out! Even Boston likes Jib Jab.

-smile-

_______________________

Canada Lake, N.Y.: If you want an example of how the blog world has totally changed public perceptions and our discourse, check out your colleague Chris Cillizza's column today, and especially the comments. Thirty years ago a journalist would suggest something -- controversial or not -- and maybe he'd get a few letters back contesting what he said.

Today, there's a veritable avalanche of ridicule and scorn in the comments section, from both left and right, because people have many more sources of information -- most of which cast doubt on what the writer has attempted to suggest. I won't be any more specific than that, but you can check it out for yourself. Yikes. Do you guys get combat pay?

washingtonpost.com: The Fix: The Case for Charlie Crist (washingtonpost.com, July 16)

Michael D. Shear: No combat pay. We readily and willingly submit ourselves to ridicule from readers, many of whom are far smarter and more sophisticated that we are.

So fire away. I'm here for you.

_______________________

McCain's Gay Parent "Clarification": Based on what McCain actually said about gays adopting children, it's crystal clear that he doesn't like gay adoption, even if it means homeless babies. How many more "clarifications" that contradict his own words does his campaign have to make before the press starts calling him a liar? I mean, why do you guys even bother asking McCain anything? You should just skip that step and pose the question to whomever on his staff is writing the continuous stream of "clarifications."

Michael D. Shear: This is indeed one of those classic moments in politics, where the "clarification" comes quickly after the statement from a politician. In this case, Sen. McCain appeared to totally oppose gay adoption and then his campaign later "clarified" that he does not support federal laws to ban such adoption but rather thinks it should be left to the states to decide.

I agree that the press should highlight these moments for all candidates. Both because they show a lack of discipline in the campaign, but more importantly because they often offer a peek into what a candidate really thinks, shorn of the "official statement" and the "campaign press release."

Having said that, it's also true that we ask presidential candidates a ton of questions and it's natural that there will be times when the candidates misspeak or don't answer fully or say one thing when they really mean another. For my part, the answer is not in declaring one of them a "liar," but rather in telling the public what happened and letting them decide.

_______________________

University Park, Md.: In the Post poll today, Obama and McCain were virtually even on the "flip-flop" question. I think that reflects the media coverage on Obama which seems to have emphasized his position changing a lot more than McCains. Is this because they're still smitten with 2000 version of McCain, or maybe just because of the access? He does refer to the media as his constituency -- maybe the flattery is working.

Michael D. Shear: I can tell you from very recent experience that there is little flattery left when it comes to the McCain campaign and the press. But I'm not sure I agree with your premise that the media have covered Obama's flip-flops more than McCains. I've certainly written plenty about Sen. McCain's change of positions. Oil drilling is one example that comes to mind, and that story ran on our front page.

_______________________

Philadelphia:"Have we reached the point in popular culture where someone doesn't really need to build their resume in order to be president?" I liked your response to this question. Another angle -- and maybe it's similar to Obama's response -- is that it depends on what you're looking for. If it's an insider who's been serving the self-serving Washington machinery for a few decades, then a typical resume would do the trick. If it's someone to take us in a new direction, then you have to look at that person's broader life experiences and judgment.

I think if Obama has a weakness, it's that even his pre-political experience mostly served him -- he didn't build or spark an extrapolitical movement, as an Martin Luther King Jr. did. A skeptic could say that you don't need to be a president to create change, and that it may even inhibit it. In a sense, Obama's counterpoint is Al Gore, who has created more change since he left elected office than he achieved while in the highest echelons of power.

Michael D. Shear: Another thought about experience.

_______________________

San Francisco: Good morning, Michael -- thanks for chatting today. What Senate seats are Democrats working hardest to defend, and what pickups are most likely for them this fall? Are there some sleeper races you are watching that may not have gotten national media exposure or attention yet? Perhaps in some big red states in the middle of the country?

Michael D. Shear: Let me put in a plug here for my colleague, Chris Cillizza, aka The Fix. He is a veritable font of knowledge when it comes to this kind of thing. Me -- alas, having focused for 16 months on the presidential campaign, I couldn't even begin to tell you which races are happening in the middle of the country, much less say anything interesting about them.

So head over to The Fix for your fix on that.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: The Fix (washingtonpost.com)

_______________________

Michael D. Shear: Okay, everyone -- I think I'm gonna give up. My connection to the "tubes" feels like I'm going through one of those straws that you get with a cocktail at the bar. Sorry about not getting to more of your questions. I'll try to be at a more high-speed locale next time.

_______________________

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.