Related Links • Campaign 2000 • Live: "Free Media" • Who do you want to talk to? E-mail us

Thursday, January 20, 2000

Most of the White House hopefuls are racing around Iowa in the remaining days before Monday's precinct caucuses with polished stump speeches, TV ads and campaign caravans, urging Iowans in all corners of the state to lend their support caucus night. What are they saying, and how will the voters react? Columnist E.J. Dionne joined us from Des Moines to talk about the candidates, the campaign process and what we can expect from the Iowa Caucuses on Monday night. The transcript follows:

Free Media: Good afternoon, E.J., and welcome. It's been almost a decade since you wrote your book "Why Americans Hate Politics." Do Americans still hate politics?

E.J. Dionne: Good afternoon and thanks for mentioning the book. I guess my answer is yes and no. Yes, because the last year or so have seen the Clinton scandal, the very divisive impeachment battle and the highly partisan atmosphere in Washington (created by both parties' awareness of how tight the battle for Congress and the presidency will be in these elections.) No, because I think politics is closer to the model I put forth in the book, because people are happier thanks to the economy and are looking for public action on matters such as education, health care, child care and other issues. Anti-government feeling is down as a result, and you can see that in the contrast between Ronald Reagan's strongly anti-government speeches and George W. Bush's much more nuanced talk about government.

If you're interested, the Brookings review (you can find it on the weB) asked me to revisit the arguments of Why Americans Hate Politics. My article is in the current issue, available through the Brookings Web site. But of course, once you look there, please come back to washingtonpost.com. (And nobody made me write that.)

Thanks again for your question, and all best.
EJ

Free Media: As a columnist and commentator, what is the difference between covering Iowa since you left the political beat as a reporter?

E.J. Dionne: Excellent question which I think about a fair bit. In some ways, there's little difference. I still look for stories, still go out and do interviews and cover candidates and wader around, still see my job as that of a reporter and analyst. With a column, of course, you can be opinionated if you wish and you can pick your own stories and subjects. I came out here with the idea of doing a few specific columns and have gone out and reported them – one is in tomorrow's paper – while also looking for new ideas and learning things I didn't know.

In general, I think that while columnists should be up front and strong when they care passionately about something, they shouldn't try to bury readers under their opinions. I like doing reporting because I want people who may disagree with me to think they might learn something or see a new angle or get some information by reading the column. I may not pull it off, but that's what I try to do.

What's exactly the same is seeing my friends and colleagues and working with them, and that's fun.

Hope you're well,
EJ

Free Media: "Momentum" is a key buzzword in the campaign. Will a win or a good showing in Iowa build momentum for New Hampshire? Are the two contests related at all in this way, or is that a mythical assumption?

E.J. Dionne: Thanks. The honest answer is that while we'll talk about this, nobody really knows because it changes so much from election to election. This year, the Iowa and New Hampshire races seem especially disconnected. My hunch is that an especially large win for Gore will help him a little in New Hamspshire, Forbes is counting on a good vote (25-30 percent) to keep him alive in New Hampshire. Bush would be hurt a bit if his vote fell into the low 30s. But I think that barring something very dramatic, New Hampshire operates independently, as it always likes to do, and I think the Democratic race goes into March 7 no matter what happens here or in N.H.

Thanks and all best, EJ

Washington, D.C.: The candidates seem to be holding more debates this primary season that ever before. Is that in fact the case, and if so, what do you think is driving that?

E.J. Dionne: I don't have the numbers, so I don't know the answer. But I'd guess the answer is yes. I think on the GOP side, front-runner Bush decided that many debates would help him overcome the attacks on him as "untested," "unserious," and the like. Everybody else needed the chance to catch up. On the Dem side, Gore needed the debates to get out of the hole he was in this fall, and Bradley as the candidate of "big ideas," as he likes to say, couldn't avoid them (and I suspect,, like Gore, likes the idea).

For what it's worth, I wrote a column praising the debates on Tuesday which will give you a sense of what I think.

Many thanks, EJ

Free Media: What are the key differences between campaigning in New Hampshire and campaigning in Iowa? Not to mention covering the campaigns in New Hampshire and covering them in Iowa?

E.J. Dionne: My friend Dan Balz said the other night that in Iowa, the answer to the question, "How far is that city/town?" is always two hours. From a reporter's point of view, New Hampshire is easier because it's more compact. Iowa is a very big place. (It helps that Des Moines is in the middle of the state, more or less.)

For the candidates, one-on-one contact is even more important in Iowa than in N.H. because they need to motivate voters to go to a caucus at a specific place at a specific time. It's a much bigger personal commitment of time and energy. So personal contact, important in N.H., is even more vital here. And television ads are important but relatively less so in Iowa.

Thanks and all best,
EJ

Free Media: What do you see or hear on the ground in Iowa that readers and viewers can't see or here in the newspaper, online or on TV?

E.J. Dionne: I pray the answer is nothing, because we should be telling you what we see. My general sense is that this campaign has turned voters on less than past campaigns – not because voters dislike the candidates (polls suggest that most voters like at least one or two candidates) but because there are few passion-arousing issues. The lower passion level could lead tower turnout (though as one Iowa politician I talked to today noted, GOP turnout could be high simply because the large field means more candidates are asking more people to show up.) We'll know whether that's true in four days.

Thanks and best, EJ

Free Media: What does Steve Forbes need to accomplish in Iowa?

E.J. Dionne: Quick answer: Come in a strong second to Bush with something like 25 percent to 30 percent. With 20 to 25, he'll probably be strong enough to keep fighting in N.H. but without a boost. Below that, he'll have a problem.

Thanks, EJ

Washington, D.C.: What is caucus turnout projected to be?

E.J. Dionne: Please look at my answer above. Absolutely nobody knows, but the pols I've talked with think lower than the usual 100,000 on each side, with GOPers having a chance at better turnout because of the multitude of candidates. But if you're asking me, I can't pretend to guess, let alone know.

And it depends on the weather.

Hope you're well, EJ

Free Media: Have you witnessed any genuinely spontaneous moments at campaign events thus far? Moments when you thought the candidates were really being themselves or said or did something that surprised everyone?

E.J. Dionne: I can't think of a good answer off hand. I think in the course of a long day, candidates fall back on being themselves more than you might think because it's too exhausting to be somebody else. I'll try to think of a better answer, but no dramatic moment comes immediately to mind. (I wasn't there yesterday when Bradley shed a tear at a health care event, but that seemed spontaneous.)

Best, E.J.Dionne

Free Media: You attended a speech by Gov. George W. Bush this morning. How has he evolved as a candidate throughout this race? What does he say that people seem to respond to most?

E.J. Dionne: That requires along answer. I'll try a few points. He got better at debates. He narrowed his focus to the tax issue, which will turn out either to be a smart idea or a mistake. (I think it's a problem for the fall campaign.) He has an interesting habit of commenting from outside himself about the mechanics of what he's doing. He switched from one question to the tax issue with a transitional remark, looked at the audience and said, "That's called a bridge." If you like that kind of post-modern awareness that the audience knows the game with you, it works. If you don't, it doesn't. His best applause line with GOPers is his pledge never to violate the "honor or dignity" of the presidency – for obvious reasons.

Thanks and best, EJ

Washington, D.C.: Which candidate, in your estimation, has committed the biggest gaffe in the campaign so far?

E.J. Dionne: Don't have one in mind. Mistakes include Bradley's failure to defend his health care plan in the very first debate and Gore's inventing the internet. Bush's comment on Christ was either brilliant politics or a mistake, depending on your point of view and which constituency you're talking about. There are others, but I'll leave it there. Mike Kinsley once said the definition of a gaffe (I'm very loosely paraphrasing) is when a candidate blurts out a truth that he's not supposed to. Always worth bearing in mind.

Best wishes, EJ

New York, N.Y.: Bush and Bradley seem to suffer from "perception problems" – Bush's that he's not too bright and Bradley that he's cranky and aloof. From what you've seen, do you think these perceptions are accurate or deserved?

E.J. Dionne: Bradley sometimes seems a little impatient and a little above it all, but often looks very engaged with people. I don't think the issue with Bush is about being smart – he's certainly bright – but whether he has had long enough experience, whether he has the seriousness ("gravitas" is the popular political word) to be president and grapples enough with hard issues. I don't think those questions are settled.

Good question, and all best, EJ

Free Media: What's your feeling about the so-called "also ran" candidates like Hatch, Bauer and Keyes? Why do you think they don't garner more attention from the media and more support from the voters?

E.J. Dionne: My hunch: They get more relative, column inches than they get percentage points in the polls, especially after debates. (Dave Broder and I were both at a Gary Bauer news conference today.) Sometimes, also-rans do get votes and aren't also-rans. Money can give some candidates an advantage. These things are cumulative and circular: Money can buy you attention through advertising which gives yu higher poll ratigs which gets you more coverage. That's not the only factor. McCain got coverage because his bio was compelling. But success breeds success, and failure breeds failure in this business. At least usually.

Best, EJ

Washington, D.C.: Does Donald Trump deserve more scrutiny than he's getting? By putting off an official announcement of candidacy, will he be able to sneak in under the radar and avoid the type of coverage an announced candidate would receive?

E.J. Dionne: He'll get it over time if he actually looks serious about running. Primary candidates get more attention now because voters begin deciding in four days. All best, EJ

Free Media: Who has the most to lose and who has the most to gain in the GOP race?

E.J. Dionne: Don't quite know what you're getting at. In Iowa, Forbes needs to be strong to keep going. Bush always has a lot to lose because he's expected to do so well – but he has the resources to fight another day no matter what happens in the next few contests. McCain has to win in New Hampshire. The rest don't have much to lose because they're not expected to do well, so they can outperform expectations pretty easily.

All best, EJ

Free Media: That was our last question today for Post columnist E.J. Dionne. Thanks to E.J., and to everyone who joined us.

Tune in tomorrow at 1 p.m. EST, when Richard Kimball, board president of Project Vote Smart, will be live to talk about the campaign and the Vote Smart questionnaire, which few front-runners participated in this year. Also, at 11 a.m. EST, Joan Biskupic will be live with Holding Court to discuss the cases the court heard this week and the ones it decided to hear in the future.

   |       |