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 campaign finance reporter Matthew Mosk was online live Tuesday, Oct. 14 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.

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

____________________

Matthew Mosk: Good morning. We are now just three weeks from Election Day, and the end to this most grueling ultra political marathon. I know there are some political reporters who can't wait to get to the finish line. So what's on your mind today, as Obama takes a day for debate prep, and Sen. McCain shoots up to New York (with running mate in tow) to raise some money for the final push?

_______________________

Waterville, Maine: Good morning. What are the projections of Obama's fundraising total in September? There are rumors that he could exceed $100 million, crushing all other records. Do we have any idea how much "cash on hand" each candidate has at this point in the race? It seems to me that Obama has a huge advantage here, but I would assume the Republican National Committee is pumping a lot of money into McCain's campaign to try to level the playing field.

Matthew Mosk: Ah, fundraising. Thanks so much Mainer, for this question. There has, indeed, been much speculation about the number Sen. Obama will post for his September fundraiser. The operative figure working its way through the rumor mill is $90 million, but if I have learned anything in the past 22 months, it's not to trust the rumor mill. I think there's no question he will post a record number, in excess of the $67 million he raised in August. Evidence of that is in the incredible amount of spending he has been doing in the past few weeks. He is vastly outspending Sen. McCain on television in almost every battleground state.

As for the Republican National Committee, they have just purchased $5 million of additional television time. But that is a drop in the bucket compared to Obama.

_______________________

Cincinnati: How do contributors skirt the $2,300 general election limit by going to fundraisers? Is the chicken Kiev with garlic mashed potatoes valued at $16,000?

Matthew Mosk: Hello Cincy. One way they are getting around this limit, legally, is by contributing money to the Democratic National Committee. When Congress worked out new fundraising rules back in 2002, they got rid of unlimited "soft money" contributions, but they did allow a single individual to donate up to $28,500 to the party. The party can then spend that money to promote its presidential candidate.

I doubt the chicken is worth it. We'll have to wait till after the election to see if the donors believe their money was well spent.

_______________________

Los Angeles: What happened to expenditures by liberal independent groups? I have seen no evidence of such spending, but have seen them from conservative or McCain-supporting groups.

Matthew Mosk: In fact, Los Angeles, the liberal groups are alive and well. Most of the liberal spending is coming from longstanding organizations such as unions and interest groups. For instance, a check of the latest reports (filed this morning) show the group Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund just plunked down more than $200,000 on television ads attacking McCain on the environment. VoteVets and Health Care for America Now (which is union-backed) have between them bought $6.6 million in pro-Obama ads last week.

On the conservative side, there are a handful of groups that have popped up. But this type of group continues to struggle for funds.

_______________________

Raleigh, N.C.: Good morning. There's a suggestion that Elizabeth Dole is starting to self-fund. Is that because of unexpectedly poor fundraising, or because of an unexpected need to spend more money?

Matthew Mosk: I had not heard this about Sen. Dole's campaign, but there certainly have been signs of trouble for her. The Raleigh newspaper today reported on a poll by Public Policy Polling, a North Carolina firm, showing Democrat Kay Hagan leading Dole by five points.

The paper reports that Dole has stepped up her advertising in recent days, and that could change the landscape there.

_______________________

Dialing for Dollars: As McCain slips in the polls, doesn't it make his fundraising that much more difficult? Particularly when he is trying to raise money on Wall Street after roundly (and correctly) criticizing them.

Matthew Mosk: I think the answer to this question is yes. And I have been told that the flip side is true -- the more that polls show Obama solidifying a lead, the easier it will be for him to raise money.

This is especially the case with respect to Internet fundraising, which fluctuates much more wildly based on the news of the day.

The caveat to this is that most of the big-dollar fundraising events (like McCain's Republican National Committee fundraiser tonight) have been planned well in advance, and much of that money was scooped up before he started to slide in the polls.

_______________________

Elmwood Park, N.J.: So, have any of the pundits and reporters who excoriated Obama for not taking public funds admitted that they were as dumb as a box of rocks, and agreed never to opine on anything political ever, ever again?

Matthew Mosk: I'd say so. A couple weeks ago, the conventional wisdom was that Obama might not see any real advantage -- that the Republican National Committee successfully was raising enough money to help McCain keep pace with Obama financially, especially after McCain received an $84 million government check.

But the picture seems to have changed, at least based on what we're seeing with the campaigns' spending.

_______________________

Southwest Nebraska: How much will a 30-minute primetime slot on several networks cost Obama's campaign?

washingtonpost.com: The Trail: Obama's Primetime Buy Comes at Bargain Price (washingtonpost.com, Oct. 10)

Matthew Mosk: Hello Southwest Nebraska! Thanks for your questions.

For those who have not been following this, Sen. Obama has such gobs of money that he is not only going to be doing conventional TV ads, he also will be airing infomercials on prime time television a few days before the election. He gets a good deal on price, too, because of federal rules that require networks to provide political candidates the lowest possible market rate for airtime. Here's how my colleague Lisa de Moraes put it:

"The Democratic presidential candidate's camp is paying under $1 million to each network to run the programming it will produce for the first half-hour of primetime that Wednesday night, less than a week before the election. This is considerably less than the networks would otherwise get for the 10-11 ad 'units' they run during that half hour, between 8 and 8:30 p.m."

_______________________

Halifax, Nova Scotia: There is a national election being held today in America's closest economic ally, its largest trading partner and the largest foreign supplier of energy to the U.S. It speaks volumes about Canada's relevance in the American mindset that one of the most important newspapers in the U.S. does not consider this event to be newsworthy enough to cover, aside from a few wire stories from AP or Reuters. Are we really that irrelevant in the U.S., or are Americans just so self-absorbed that unless we flood your nation with illegal immigrants or elect a mullah as Prime Minister today, there is no way the American media will take any note of what happens up here?

washingtonpost.com: Final Canada poll shows stronger Conservative minority (Reuters, Oct. 14)

Matthew Mosk: This seems as good a time as any to remind ourselves that there is a whole wide world out there -- and they don't all care about our insanely interesting presidential campaign. Thanks for the reality check, Halifax!

_______________________

Florissant Valley, Mo.: Morning, Matthew. Do you think there's a chance that if the market keeps springing back and people get less antsy about the economy, McCain's numbers could rise? Or is the national "mood" pretty well set in stone and it would take a major seismic event to reverse the trends? Thanks.

Matthew Mosk: Thanks for this question, Missouri. The honest answer is, I really have no idea. But I think it's clear that as the country fell into a panic over the economic collapse, polling showed people turning toward Obama. I don't know how people's confidence about the economy will change in the next three weeks, but it stands to reason that if they become more confident, they could shift their allegiances again.

_______________________

Gaithersburg, Md.: Mr. Mosk, this morning on C-SPAN a caller claimed that the $700 billion package for Wall Street included money (I believe she said $500 million) for the voter registration group ACORN. Is this a rumor? What is the source of this idea? Thanks.

Matthew Mosk: This sounds to me as though it almost certainly is completely wrong. I think you may have misheard this.

But I have a number of questions lined up about ACORN, so I'll post a few and we can discuss the group and the allegations against them.

_______________________

Detroit: I'm really surprised how disinterested the media is in Obama's combined fundraising and voter registrations scandals. Mickey Mouse is registered to vote in Florida, courtesy of ACORN -- and he'll vote for Obama, naturally. And Obama's record-setting donations are sprinkled with fake names. No investigation has been done as far as I can tell to see how deeply corrupt his fundraising practices are. Are you willing to discount the Mickey Mouses, or do you think it's a sign of a deeper, more troubling corrupt core at the heart of Obama?

Matthew Mosk: Here's another. ... Just to be clear, there are two sides to this story.

The RNC has alleged that ACORN is filing fraudulent voter registrations. The RNC's chief spokesman last week called ACORN a "quasi-criminal group" during one of a series of news conferences, charging that the group was committing fraud during its voter-registration drives. "We don't do that lightly," RNC chief counsel Sean Cairncross added.

Here's what an ACORN official told The Post yesterday: "It's pretty shocking that anyone would say such a thing," Bertha Lewis, interim chief organizer for National ACORN, said of the assertion. "It's a lie, it's irresponsible, and I'm really disappointed that they would say such a thing. What's the meaning of 'quasi-criminal' anyway?"

_______________________

Washington: With all due respect, Matthew, I think Halifax's comment about the Canadian elections meant to convey that we in the U.S. don't seem to care about their elections (which is true: the U.S. public doesn't care about anybody else's elections unless we think the potential winner is an "enemy.") I think most of the rest of the world is very interested in our presidential election because the U.S. is a powerful force in the world.

Matthew Mosk: Yes. Now that I read it again, I realize you're right.

_______________________

The Numbers: Okay, if 95 percent of ACORN's 1,300,000 voter registration forms are perfectly accurate that still leaves 65,000 "joke" or padded forms; 65,000 sounds great for an anti-Obama talking point, but in context does it amount to anything? Especially considering that ACORN points out troubling forms to the election boards? Why has this non-story jumped from the crazy pages at Michelle Malkin's house of hate and onto Page 2 of my paper?

Matthew Mosk: Well, I don't think this is a story that we can ignore. Here's why: If this winds up being a close election, every element of the process from registrations to hanging chads will be under a microscope.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: GOP Officials Assail Community Group (Post, Oct. 14)

_______________________

Ashland, Ore.: Matthew, how close is the Republican National Committee to cutting bait on McCain and shoring up congressional candidates like Dole or Chambliss? Or would cutting bait on McCain hurt imperiled senators more than the money would help?

Matthew Mosk: This is a terrific question, Ashland. It's a subject of considerable internal debate inside the Republican Party. That's because the fundraising arm of the Republican senators, the NRSC, has been significantly outspent by their counterparts on the Democratic side. At this point, though, the RNC largely is populated with McCain people -- he is essentially the head of the party. So my bet would be that the RNC stays on its mission to get McCain elected.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: How do Obama's infomercials not violate the equal time clauses in states like California? It sounds like this is the exact kind of thing the law is supposed to prevent.

Matthew Mosk: I don't think there is anyone telling McCain he cannot do the same thing. It's a question of money. That's why the financial imbalance is becoming such a significant part of the political story.

_______________________

Chicago: How much longer can the McCain campaign afford to keep staff and advertise in states where recent polls show him down by double digits (Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, etc.)? When will we see the McCain camp start pulling out of states to concentrate on the ones they think they really can win? Will Obama have to pull out of any? How much did Obama pull out of Michigan after McCain ceded the state to him?

Matthew Mosk: This is another similar question that we are following closely. I think we'll have a better sense next week, when we see the latest campaign finance reports, of how many tough decisions the McCain campaign will face regarding spending. Right now, they are focusing their money on key television markets within the swing states, while Obama is spending statewide in those states.

_______________________

New Orleans: I think Obama's flip-flop on public financing wasn't just a bad day for pundits -- it was a bad day for America. Billion-dollar presidential elections are not good for democracy. You've either got to be personally wealthy or tied to the corrupt Chicago political machine to compete in that world -- or both, in Obama's case.

Matthew Mosk: Thanks for this comment, New Orleans. There is a push in Congress to update the presidential public financing system so that candidates won't feel pressure to exit the system and take the free-spending approach. It will be interesting to see how it progresses after this election is over. This campaign is giving us the first real look at how unlimited spending would work.

_______________________

New York: Matthew, does having more money win the race, or does winning (i.e., people like the message) bring in the money? Which is more important, money or message?

Matthew Mosk: I think most people will tell you that money alone does not win a campaign -- if that were true, John McCain would not be the Republican nominee right now -- but money at this moment is giving Obama an awful lot of freedom to get his message out in key states. There's no way to know whether that will be decisive, but it certainly is not hurting him.

_______________________

Mickey Mouse is registered to vote in Florida and he'll vote for Obama: Really? The actual Mickey Mouse will arrive at a polling place and cast a ballot? Will you be reporting this momentous event, Matthew?

Matthew Mosk: I gladly will cover the Orlando polling stations to see what happens! (You think The Post will let me bring my kids?) :)

_______________________

Princeton, N.J.: Look there's a big difference between registration fraud and voter fraud. Do you expect Mickey to actually vote? People got paid to register people, just as conservatives did for the referendum in California about gay marriage. Some of them in both cases put down extra names to get a little more dough. Some of it was jokes. There never had been any cases of voter fraud associated with ACORN.

Matthew Mosk: This is a more serious response to the previous question. Thanks, Princeton reader.

_______________________

Falls Church, Va.: If a half-hour ad buy on a network is less than $1 million for a presidential campaign, why don't we see it happening more often?

Matthew Mosk: I think there is some question about how effective it will be (especially if it winds up opposite Game 6 of the World Series). (Go Dodgers!)

Honestly, my sense from folks I've spoken to is that the 30-second ad is more efficient, and the advertiser reaches a more-targeted voter. In essence, it's more precise.

A half-hour of network TV is really a luxury that not many candidates have tried. My recollection is that Ross Perot bought several, and we can see how that worked out.

_______________________

Hampton Cove, Ala.: Have you spent time marveling at the contrast in coverage to the sexual exploits of Mark Foley and Tim Mahoney? It seems it's front page when it's a Republican and buried when its a Democrat. Rahm Emanuel knew about it for a year. Where is the outrage that a politician can pay off a mistress with taxpayer money and then get endorsed by his party (the Democratic Party)?

washingtonpost.com: Scandal Embroils Congressman (Post, Oct. 14)

Matthew Mosk: Good question, Alabama. I will pass this along to our ombudsman, who spends a lot of time studying our coverage trends and looking for problems with balance. She'd be better equipped to evaluate this. Her name is Deborah Howell, and here is some of her recent work on this subject:

_______________________

Alaska: Do you sense that Sarah Palin has done more to energize the left than any other factor thus far? It seems to have been all downhill after the short-term boost of her base. This group is not large enough to get McCain elected, but she sure has brought out the indies and moderates to the Obama camp.

Matthew Mosk: I'd be curious for other opinions on this. I subscribe to the view that the vice presidential pick rarely if ever winds up influencing the outcome of a presidential election.

For a few days there, I wondered if Gov. Palin might challenge that idea. But at this point, especially with whatever impressions are left by tomorrow's debate, I no longer think she'll have a significant impact on the outcome.

_______________________

St John's, Newfoundland: Sadly, it seems as if most Canadians don't really care about this election, either.

Matthew Mosk: Did I mention that the Caps crushed the Canucks last night? (Go Caps!)

_______________________

Collingswood, N.J.: Actually, Ross Perot's TV time got him a lot ... he was the only third-party candidate to make a serious splash a presidential election in my lifetime (more than 40 years).

Matthew Mosk: Hmmm. Okay. This is a fair point.

_______________________

Matthew Mosk: Well gang, this was fun. Nice to see how fired up everyone is. Should be an interesting day of political news as the candidates gear up for a big debate. Stay tuned.

Thanks!

_______________________

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.