Newsvine Q&A: Chuck Todd on U.S. Politics

The following is a summary of the Questions and Answers, pulled from the Newsvine comment thread below.

When can we expect questions of politicians regarding the biotech take over of the food supply, the impact on global trade and domestic pricing, consumer rights associated with a policy of unregulated, unlabeled ingredients and candidate positions on the policies that have transformed the Nations commodity crops to patent protected, private investments in ever green revenue streams? -Pamela Drew

a great question; one would assume that we'd be hearing a lot more on biotech issues in general because of the possible positive impact the expansion of all things biotech could have. And both campaigns are searching for ways to promote jobs. As for your specific concerns, my guess is that the campaigns will continue to be reactive so that when something happens, like a food supply contamination scare, these issues will surface in the campaign.

Mr.Todd.

Why do we always let the Republicans slide, when they have control, and put conservative administrators in charge of social services they opposed in-the-first-place, then they mismanage them, run them into the ground, , so later they can come back and say things like "We tried that remember, and it didn't work."? Why don't we call them on these things and let them do this? We got to the moon, and we can't run a (Government) school, or manage SS? Are they just bad idea's and a waste of tax money, or reverse the purpose of the Federal Agencies to protect corporate interest rather then the best interest of the people (EPA, FDA, FCC, name one..) is it simple incompetence, or a deliberate undermining of the system to break it down, or both?
-Dan Hallo, aka, Zoilus

The GOP has struggled for years balancing running the government with one of their core messages of less government. It's easy to want less government when you are not the party in charge, much more difficult when you get put in charge. It may be why the country regularly ends up with two-party control of the executive and legis. branches.

Mr.Todd.

Why do we always let the Republicans call the Democratic Congress, a failure when everyone knows you need a 2/3rds majority to overturn a veto or impeach a President, and it's the Republican members of Congress who block or threaten to block everything the Democrats want to accomplish. You need votes to get things done in the Senate or the Congress. Something the Democrats don't have. Bush Never vetoed one Bill till after 2004, not one, why are the Democrats being labeled partisan?
-Dan Hallo, aka, Zoilus

well, i am not sure who you are referring to with the "we" -- the argument you are making is something that belongs in the campaign debate for Congress. If this is the case then Democrats should make this case and attempt to win 60 senate seats.

Do you think, that having only two candidates turns the election from president election to party election?

Is there a danger, that candidates are not trying to be the better than their opponents, but more interested in motivating own party voters? Will the candidates concentrate more on their own voters than their opponents? -Pasi

actually, i don't think we do. I think are presidential elections are least party-like of the western democracies. In Great Britain, it's clear that it's a party election, not a Prime Minister election, less so here.

Chuck....I'm curious as to this shift on Obama's part.

He seems to want it both ways....

In various speeches, he has spoken out against some Democrats and cozied up to the ideas of the Republicans. He has said he can be uniter of both parties (I believe he said that last fall).

Today, he spoke with Hillary in New Hampshire. He's looking to "unite" the democrats.

So...is he looking to unite the democrats against the republicans? Is he looking to unite the republicans and the democrats? And for what purpose? To get him elected?

I'm a bit confused by this chameleon character. -jen orozco

I think he's taking the advice of Richard Nixon: run to the wing in the primary and the middle in the general. To some, it's going to look like flip-flopping, to others, it's going to look re-assuring. I think Obama's goal between no and November is to look like a safe candidate; I think McCain's goal is to make Obama look like a risk; it's as simple as that and that's why Obama's trying to curry favor so much with the middle.

Chuck for once I was dismayed at Senator Barack Obama this week commenting on a Death (Capital) Punishment cases whilst in full election mode. I guess that's politics but it does not take into account the persons right to appeal & in my view severely breaches certain privacy provisions for both the victim & the alleged perpetrator. Do you think politicians should be commenting on individual cases. Here in Australia it is generally a little more frowned upon ? -Barry Rutherford

Generally, politicians usually avoid commenting on specific cases, but when they go all the way to the Supreme Court, it would see odd if our candidates didn't have an opinion.

Hi Chuck,

Do you think the Senate democrats will vote to censure, condemn or remove Joe Lieberman from his committees once the November election is wrapped up? If so, on what grounds? -Pacific Northwest Bloger

Interesting question: I think it depends on who wins the presidency. My guess is that if McCain wins, the Senate Democrats will be more inclined to punish Lieberman but if Obama wins, Obama will prevent the Senate Democrats from kicking him out.

Chuck Todd, how do you manage to appear non-partisan and unbiased in the face of disparities between candidates that must affect you personally? Do you think journalists should express their personal views in disclaimers? Would you be able to maintain such equilibrium if you thought a candidate would be absolutely disastrous as a President? -oldfogey
Good question.

I would add to that, that sometimes the independent take on things actually costs this country and the press more than it helps. I feel that in the attempt to remain "unbiased" or PC, we fail to recognize how flawed some candidates policies really are. -MartinEZ
MartinEZ, you hit the nail on the head. I think too many of us take the news reports, which are very factual, and give them credence just because they are news. News reporters have a duty to chronicle both the true and the false. To ask them to differentiate at all times is asking too much. But they should point out fallacies when they know them.

Example: The Unity, NH, Obama - Clinton show of togetherness yesterday, the 27th of June. A straight, factual report could have included just the video of speeches and the obvious handshakes and smiles, the comments of comity and the gladness of both parties. This could and would have been perceived by many as a spontaneous and well attended rally in support of Obama that came about because it was a natural course of political happenings. A further rendition of the facts and the truth behind them leaked out through the comments of several reporters who reported the occasion as a well managed, almost Hollywood like, and much primped production of a world which has become lead by video clips and sound bites. -oldfogey

I appreciate the premise of the question. One thing I want to assure you of is that I am human being which means of course I have personal feelings. But to be honest, the more up close I've gotten to covering campaigns, the more personal my choice has become. That's a luxury I have that not every voter gets and I am lucky to have it; But to answer your question specifically, it's my job to make sure everyone is getting a fair shake, emphasis on the word "fair." Our job is to be fair and if the truth hurts, then we inflict the pain, no matter the consequence. I have the highest regard for people that run for office; sure there's ambition and ego driving many of these folks, but I have yet to meet a public official that didn't get into office to change something in a way they believed was positive. Even the ones that eventually get corrupted had a noble reason for why they FIRST got involved in politics. I think our job also is to make sure voters and viewers have all the facts at hand so they can make that judgment. Sure we have influence here in the media, but we should use our influence to add to a voter's knowledge, not tell them how to vote.

I don't want to beat you up, and know that I love MSNBC. But watching and hearing about Wesley Clark's comments for three days did not educate the voters, nor did it present fairness. In full context and relationship to Schieffer's question, he spoke the truth using his judgement as a 4-star general. The media should have saved the 'gasp' and given the full context, not the sound bites that loop continually.

Just my opinion. -Clara Kansas City, MO

I understand your frustration with the coverage but considering that both McCain and Obama seem to take offense to Clark's statements, it's clear he dug the hole; He was very inartful in what he was doing and why he did it, I just don't know. You may agree with what he said but it was bad politics. It allowed McCain to talk about his military service and in turn remind folks of Obama's lack of military service.

Chuck: When considering the Dem's VP pick, I'd love your thoughts on my theories re what disqualifies the likely VP candidate, and what you think of the remainder who aren't disqualified by the analysis below. NEGATIVES
1. Obama needs a Dem majority in the Legislature to accomplish his Agenda. Thus, he shouldn't pick a sitting or prospective Dem Senator or Congressperson in a Red or Swing State ... Eliminate Webb, McCaskill, Nelson, Bayh, Warner, etc. Not likely a problem for Dodd or Biden. 2. Too many Americans who have problems voting for one person of color, let alone two. This is especially true because of the problems with white Appalachian & Rust Belt vote. Eliminate Richardson & Powell. 3. Can't pick a woman and alienate the Hillary Vote. Eliminate Sebelius, napolitano, mccaskill, etc. 4. Vetting Issues - Webb's advocacy for Confederate flag & anti-woman positions; Hillary's problem - Bill Clinton's Library, Donors and Women, and Clintons bring out the Moral Majority offsetting the hige Dem registration this primary season. 5. Kaine & Warner are tempting but with these two and Webb in VA, it seems as if Obama already has a great shot of carrying the state, regardless if they are on the ballot. 6. Too risky to pick a Republican or former Republican as VP -- even if Obama puts a few on the Cabinet -- thus eliminating Hagel, Bloomberg, Powell, Webb, Clarke. However, Bloomberg was a Republican for only 4 years. 7. Don't need a governor with admin experience as Obama's campaign has proven he can manage people, organize, and do all that you typically need when picking a governor. Eliminate Richardson, Warner, Bayh, Vilsack, Rendell, Kaine. 8. Those who uncategorically stated they were NOT interested. Eliminate Strickland, Warner & Rendell. 9. With the exception of LBJ, state strategy hasn't worked well so eliminate people whose ONLY draw is a swing state like IN, MI, NM, MO, VA, NC. It's a nice benefit if it compliments other needs but shouldn't be the primary reason. NEEDS (people not eliminated above): 1. White Male to bring back Rust Belt and Appalachian WM vote ... all of the following.
2. Anti-War Military Man to counter McCain's military experience ... Reed, Jones, Bob Kerrey, Zinni
3. Foreign Policy Experience ... Biden, Nunn, Reed, Daschle, Bob Kerrey, Zinni,
4. Economic Experience ... Dodd, Graham, Warner, Bloomberg
5. Can bring a Swing State: GA- Nunn; VA-Warner; PA-Biden; FL-Bloomberg; QUESTION - who can help with Michigan?
6. Jewish Vote to help Carry FL - Bloomberg, Graham Best VP Options: Biden, Jones, Zinni, Daschle, Kerrey, Nunn, Bloomberg
Cabinet Options: Bloomberg; Hagel; Graham, Edwards; Napolitano; Dodd -cranegirl

You have put a lot of thought into this: I think political considerations like losing a Dem vote in the Senate is going to play into some decisions on the VP and cabinet fronts. Looks like you have Biden, Reed and Zinni as the folks who help Obama the most. As for Mich.: there isn't an obvious person to help though maybe Edwards or even a Gephardt could help there.

Chuck:
What are your VP thoughts on Ret. Gen. Anthony Zinni?

I didn't know much about him besides seeing him on TV once in a while so did some research. I think he may be a great person to round out the Dem Ticket. Here's why:

OPPOSED THE WAR & ITS EXECUTION PLAN
1. Opposed the War - aligned with Obama's position
2. Had courage & Integrity to oppose the War unlike most retired generals
3. Authored Book "Battle Ready", published in 2004, that detailed 10 serious criticisms of the rationale and execution of the war. Testified to Congress re same.
4. Told Bush they needed 300,000+ Troops to Carry Out his Mission to Invade Iraq
5. Said of Bush's War Strategy, "I'm not sure what planet they live on."
6. Had foresight to realize that Military Success is "just the beginning of the beginning."
7. May 2004 QUOTES from 60 Minutes ... "Wrong War, Wrong Place, Wrong Time." ... "heads should roll at the Pentagon... serious derelictions of duty ... criminal negligence." 8. Co-authored Feb 08 letter to Congress opposing torture

TERRORISM EXPERTISE
1. Warned Congress re Bin Laden in MARCH 2000 2. Warned Congress before 9/11 that Afghanistan was harboring Bin Laden

HAS MOST MILITARY & FOREIGN POLICY EXPERIENCE
1. Two Masters Degrees in International Relations and in Management
2. Four-Star General - Marine Corp - 35 years of Active Military Duty
3. Traveled to 70 countries & in nearly every military operation since the 60s 4. Special Envoy on Israeli-Palestinian Peace Effort
5. More Military & Foreign Policy Experience than McCain 6. Knows More re Middle East than McCain (Unlike McCain, knows difference between Shia and Sunni) 7. As Ex-Marine, Knows More re Infantry than McCain and Iraq/Afghanistan are groundwars
8. Developed Rapport with Musharref and Somali Warlords to Keep Dialogue Open
9. Called Global Warming a Serious Security Threat

INTANGIBLES
1. Son is Captain in the Marines - not like many in GOP who vote for war but don't send their own kids.
2. Italian Born in Conshohocken PA & attended Villanova - will help secure PA
3. Nicknames - Warrior Diplomat and The Godfather
4. Italian with military background - since Italians have large presence in Unions - could help secure rank & file Labor vote that sometimes swing Red in gun-toting states
5. Catholic - could help secure swing Catholic vote in upper midwest states
6. Hispanic - because most Hispanics are Catholic & because of similarities between Italian & Hispanic ethnicities, could also help secure Hispanic Vote
7. Recently a Commander at Quantico Base in VA and AFB in FL - both swing states
8. Described as an Eloquent old hand at fielding questions - should be great on the stump
9. Lobbied with Nelson & Graham of FL to keep CENTCOM in Tampa FL instead of Middle East as Rumsfled wanted because big base in middle East would incite more violence - help w FL vote. 10. Military & Veteran Vote wouldn't all go to McCain: Quote from a Marine Blog: "A Marine advising the president would help weed out the BS. Might make me want to actually vote for a Democrat."

ECONOMICS
1. Undergrad degree from Villanova in Economics

NO VOTING RECORD TO ATTACK
1. Hasn't served in elected office so no voting record to attack

POSSIBLE CONS
1. Voted for Bush in 2000 but admitted he was wrong
2. Said he never wanted to run for public office
3. Outspoken . . . can he stay on message?
4. Not sure whether he's aligned on other important Dem issues
5. How does he feel re "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? -cranegirl
Wow, cranegirl, that's a lot of info on Zinni that I didn't know; thanks for pulling it all together for us. How do you feel about the other two generals -- Clark and James Jones? -Elaine B
Yeah, the first time I really heard about Zinni was after GW Bush(43) was elected and always related to foreign policy issues, usually pushing something more like GHWBush (41) would have pursued internationally. I was always impressed when I read what Zinni said, but never had investigated him much.

I had no idea Clark had a Jewish background too. I just was thinking Clark is quite used to being on the public stage, has all of the things you mentioned and that ability to be TV-ready is a quality that can't be overlooked in this You Tube age. Although, that probably works against him too, as he's a regular on CNN and MSNBC, so there is probably some You Tube ammunition out there. -cranegirl

You should know that the very first person I ever heard from on the idea of Zinni... Tim Russert. Tim thought Zinni was in play long before his name started circulating. I think the lack of campaign experience is going to scare Obama a bit. I really think he'll go conventional because he's the risk already so he'll be risk-averse on the VP front.

Minnesota. Can the GOP win it? More importantly, can Pawlenty carry it?

Also, which VP will bring the best state(s)? -Andrew (aka Online Apps)

I think Minnesota is a long shot for McCain; if the GOP convention wasn't there, my guess is that McCain and the GOP would already be conceding it. I think Pawlenty can make the state closer but not carry it. All of the agricultural Midwest states are tough for McCain because Obama seems to over-perform thanks to his Midwest connections and because the ag-midwest is much more anti-war than any other swing region. Iowa/Wis/MN have always been very anti-interventionist historically.

I'm more intrigued on the GOP side on the idea of Tom Ridge in Pennsylvania; I think there's no other running mate possibility that could have more effect on a state than Ridge (more so than Romney in Michigan, in fact).

Chuck:

the ag-midwest is much more anti-war than any other swing region. Iowa/Wis/MN have always been very anti-interventionist historically. Beautiful and underappreciated point.

Could you say that on TV sometime? Please? -jfxgillis
Normally, I would agree with Chuck on Minnesota as he makes very good arguments. However, this is the state that elected Jesse Ventura as its Governor. Could it really resist electing its Governor as Vice President? I think it will be very close. -Gawk Squawk

Pawlenty is the one of the future leaders of the GOP and McCain likes him a lot; the campaign is VERY impressed with his abilities as a surrogate but if he can't bring MN to the GOP column, he seems like a reach this time around.

as for the anti-war point in the ag-midwest, I do try and point this out when talking about the various regions and their unique political identities, but you are right, I haven't done it a lot.

Hi Chuck,

It's so great to have you back!

The polls seem to show an Obama bounce, but are all over the map. Could you please talk a bit about the double digit polls, whether the leads are real, and the whole "party ID" and likely voter vs registered voter issues? There's been a lot of discussion of the polls on Newsvine and I'd love to see you explore the Newsweek poll, the LA Times poll and the WP-WSJ-Quinnipiac polls, especially in contrast with the daily Gallup tracking polls (which show little if any bounce).

I'd really like to know how much of a bounce Obama really got and what things we need to watch out for on future polls.

Also, historically, do the polls at this point tend to be predictive of November?

Thanks!! -Elaine B
Chuck---I think Elaine B's questions in 14.0 are excellent. I had wanted to ask a similar question vis a vis the 2 outlier polls---Newsweek (+15%) and LA Times/Bloomberg (+12%)----what do you think is the primary reason why these two polls went off the mark vs. the more likely something-less-than-double-digit Obama lead at this juncture? And I would have expected a double-digit bounce for Obama post his nomination why do you think he fell short? -lisaed

Nothing makes me more nervous this year when attempting to examine the election than the issue of polling. In a word: it's a mess. The internet has attracted a lot of bad pollsters to the arena and suddenly we're deluged with numbers, averages of these numbers, over-analysis etc. Bottom line: 75% of all the public polls are junk and the very well-intentioned news sites that average this stuff are getting an average of junk.

I think there's clearly a trend in Obama's direction these last two weeks and the way I confirmed this was talking to the campaigns and getting my hands on as much professionally done polling as I could; polls conducted by partisans on both sides who get paid to be right, not paid to poll. I don't envy the political junkie out there who is desperate for numbers; because you can always find numbers but you don't know if the numbers are good. Generally, there's a good public pollster or two in every state; that poll that every campaign pro says, "yeah, so and so is pretty good." We are going to try and do our best to only report polls at NBC and MSNBC and MSNBC.com that we think are done well and accurately represent the state of the race.

BTW, another reason why polls are a mess: we have no idea what the electorate is going to look like; we have one of the two major parties who has a MAJOR brand issue (hence the party I.D. issues) and we have an African-American candidate where it's possible some folks may lie more about their support for him than they would if he were white. Toss in all three issues and you have yourself a challenge even for the best pollsters, let alone folks who got into the polling business a few years ago.

Chuck:

Sorry for the loss of your pal Tim Russert.

Question: Judging by the sucess of Unity, NH rally, is Obama's advance team really, really good or really, really, really good?

Can you give us the skinny on who they are and who does what? Having that local guy introduce Hillary and Obama was sheer genius. -jfxgillis

Steve Hildebrand is one of the brains behind the Obama field operation; Lots of Hildebrand's proteges are running state campaigns for Obama. Moreover, the Obama campaign has been very good at using new technologies, like social networking sites etc., to crowd build in a very impressive way. But clearly these guys look like they learned a thing or two from Bush '00 and Bush '04, both very impressive advance operations as well.

Hi Chuck,

If you ask me, I'd be inclined to say that our government (especially Congress) is broken. Rampant partisan politics within all three branches have held real progress in check for nearly twenty years now. My question:

Regardless of who wins in November, will either candidate really be able be able to buck the "party-first" trend and get things moving forward as a nation again? -evaunit6

There are a lot of very smart folks currently in Congress sitting on both sides of the aisle who believe what you believe. I think there's exhaustion out in the populace for the partisanship and so I do think both potential presidents will have a six month honeymoon to be post-partisan and the public will back it. I don't know if either Cong. leadership team is ready to cave too quickly to a new president of the opposite party. We'll see.

Hi Chuck, I am very concerned tha Alkida and Osama bin Laden have done just what they promised to do, ruin our economy. Do you feel they could be the money behind oil speculation, the falling dollars?

I am also concerned the Republicans are going to get us into a war before the end of the year. How can we trust them anymore. If we're sending more troops to Irac, when we need more troops in Afganistan/Pakistan, where are those forces coming from? The Draft, are they going to get us into another World War? Help! -Debi1208

I think the admin knows that a new military confrontation would need a political will that isn't there. As for the economy. it's an interesting theory; even if not true, it's clear that we have an energy-economy issue that needs to be tackled.

How can Obama exceed the already high expectations for his convention speech in August?
Chuck, do you think Obama will give his best speech of the campaign at the convention? -Michael Porter

Good point; My guess is that he's going to do something a bit non-traditional for his convention speech. Maybe a location change or something because you are right, they have a MAJOR expectation problem; but it's the type of expectation problem the campaign likes having.

Hi Chuck,
I forgot to add this to my question above.

You've mentioned on MSNBC that it looked like Obama was going for a VP with security/foreign policy credentials. What are your thoughts re the following security/foreign policy potential veeps (plus any I've missed):

Webb
Nunn
Gen Clark (my fav)
Gen Zinni
Gen James Jones
Bayh
Biden
Hagel (I don't see this happening) Thanks for your insight. -Elaine B

Ok, let me run down your list

Webb: the nat'l security creds and bipartisan creds are stellar; my question is whether the country is ready for a thrice-married VP.

Nunn: Is he ready for the modern campaign? Again, credentials are stellar but... he's just a year younger than McCain.

Gen Clark (my fav): the guy has a great resume but I think he's proven both in 04 and now that he's just not a good politician. He just doesn't have the instincts to, well, play the game.

Gen Zinni: I think it's tough to bring someone in as VP who has NEVER run for office before.

Gen James Jones: See Zinni. But do know that Hillary, more so than Obama, was very taken by Jones; he'd have been on her short list too.

Bayh: is he associated enough with nat'l security issues in the minds of the public? Not as much...

Biden: as this guy. I think Biden is the frontrunner if there is such a thing for the Obama short list.

Hagel (I don't see this happening): I think Obama would love to do this but the domestic stuff is a hurdle; he's just very conservative on a number of key non-security issues.

I think others I'd include: Jack Reed of Rhode Island (very well respected, very low-key guy; Obama may bond with him).

Mr. Todd:

I am repeating a question I asked a few weeks ago (with modifications).

My question to you is, why aren't the pundits thinking this electoral season might actually produce a "critical election," which may signal the beginning of yet another party realignment? As you know, there are five characteristics of party realignment, and I believe that even now, in the primary season, we are in the process of seeing these characteristics come to fruition. (See Abramson et al. 2007, Change and Continuity in the 2004 and 2006 Elections, for descriptions of these characteristics).

(1)Past realignments take place when there are changes in the regional bases of party support. So far in the primary, the South has demonstrated very strong Democrat voting. If this continues, certain states in the South may come into play by November with the potential to someday upend the "Solid South". Plus, there are other states that may come into play in the general election (e.g. Colorado, New Mexico). (2)Changes in the social bases of party support. Older women and whites without college education are resisting the call to support Obama, with many threatening to vote for McCain should Obama receive the nomination. This suggests that the social group could, in time, move to the Republicans. The actions of the West Virginia Democrats cause me to think of this. They act more like the pre-1964 Democrats anyway, and we know that most of them broke with the party when the Civil and Voting Rights Acts were passed. (3)Past realignments are characterized by the mobilization of new groups into the electorate. Young people are being mobilized, as are minority groups (e.g. more African-Americans, Hispanics and Asians have registered and voted so far). (4)Past realignments have occurred when new issues have divided the electorate. Well, race is just too easy, so I'll go to something else - Hillary's disapproval ratings, her baggage and supposed inevitability, or the candidates' positions on the war. (Update: So far, the issues that would divide the electorate - the war, the economy - are actually bringing them together. The handful of Hillary supporters that won't acquiesce to Obama does not appear to be as big of a problem as it once was, but the convention is still nearly two months away, and anything can happen before then.) (5)Voters are changing not just their voting patterns but the way they think about the political parties. In the wake of the furor regarding Clinton's "hardworking white people" comment, whites may be thinking hard about their commitment to the Democratic party and I assume, without reservation, that Obama's success will look to some as if the Democratic party will start going out of its way to cater to the needs of African-Americans and not their own. While the results of West Virginia (and parts of Ohio and Pennsylvania) readily bear this out, I fear that even non-racist, non-prejudiced whites - and other minorities - may feel this way too (especially since the Rev. Wright issue reared its ugly head and rightly raised concern in the minds of everyone). At the same time, there are Republicans who are excited about what Obama brings to the campaign, and are changing their party affiliation to vote for him. Here's hoping that should he be elected, he will perform in such a way that the affiliation change will be permanent. (Update: there are those who won't vote for Obama because he's Black - period. Plus, there are those who just can't seem to let those rumors die.) So, based on these characteristics and the events that have transpired so far, I surmise that we could be on the way to experiencing realignment in the Democratic Party. Potential party realignment is most likely since Obama has received the nomination, and will become (in my opinion) a certainty should he win the presidency. Therefore, the existing arguments made by pundits that "Obama will have trouble winning the battleground states" or "Hillary does better with white, working class voters" may be rendered moot in the wake of the restructured electoral map, which will embody greater youth and minority participation, and recognition of states/coalitions that until now have been largely ignored.

Obama's team appears to be embracing the five tenets of realignment already without directly admitting it. The fact that he's winning over unlikely supporters (e.g. members of the religious right) and is making inroads in "Republican" states suggests this. Plus, there are still some raw feelings among Hillary supporters (most notably, her husband) and many Republicans to date are not sure if they can "hold their noses" and vote for McCain. So, even if Obama's team hasn't read Abramson et al. or V.O. Key's "A Theory of Critical Elections" (1959), they are conducting this campaign as if they have. If that's so, then why haven't the pundits starting discussing the possibility of a critical election and (possible) party realignment yet? Or better yet, do they think it's too early to start this type of discussion? -Kingam

You must be a political science professor somewhere, right? Here's the thing with realignments, we never know we were in one until after a couple of elections. I think the 1980 election clearly was a realignment that didn't come to full fruition on the Congressional level until 1994. Sometimes it takes that long. I do think that the population movements, particularly out West are going to produce some realignment soon; we've seen it on the GOV level, not quite yet though on the federal level. Maybe this election or maybe the next one; it's possible McCain's residency in the West will help stave this off. But I think something's afoot out west, something in the Midwest too... I don't buy the South outside a shifting of the geographic borders. For instance, TN, KY and WV used to be competitive border states; now they appear to be more solidly GOP states as NC and VA begin looking more competitive. We're simply see some shifts but states that culturally Southern, highly religious and native-state born folks still vote Republican. VA, NC and FL and to a lesser extent GA are seeing an influx of new out-of-state residents which is creating a realignment in those states.

Can Obama really do anything with the South? So far, all the polls show McCain strongly ahead. Can Obama win it, or will Mac have to lose it? -Andrew (aka Online Apps)

I think the only southern states truly in play are FL, VA and NC and all are in play because all three states are culturally less southern today than they were even four years ago or eight years ago. All three are experiencing population growth from non-native residents. And it's these non-natives who are voting Democrat in greater numbers.

As for the other Southern states potentially in play, including GA, MS, LA and AR; I think GA might come into play if Obama really does motivate a bunch of new voters to come out. Georgia, demographically, is very young and considering that Obama polls well with younger whites; i could see him spiking African-American turnout, getting 40% of the white vote under 50 and then having Bob Barr peal away 2-3 points so that the winning number for Obama in GA was 47 or 48...

DEMS CARRYING RED STATES & SWING STATES - Chuck, after traveling extensively in the South and in Appalachia, I've heard the N word and other racist comments more in a day than I've heard in my life in the West. In light of this, I'm worried Obama can't carry some states unless there's a massive African American turnout to overcome the racism.

Given that this year seems to be the year for identity politics, have you ever done your iINFAMOUS CHUCK TODD NUMBERS CRUNCHING regarding: (1) the population of registered and unregistered African American in Red States and swing states? (2) the number of newly registered voters in these Red states and swing states.

I'd love to see a state by state analysis of registered voters broken down by party affiliation, with a comparison to the census demographics for that state so we can see if Obama has a chance in that state with a demographically targeted voter registration drive.

I know this is a sensitive topic but please Chuck, no one else has the courage to take on this sensitive topic and give us only the facts and an unbiased analysis. Even if you don't answer this question on Newsvine, can you tackle this topic for Hardball or Race for the White House? -cranegirl

This is a project we are working on. It's just not clear how many new voters Obama can add to the rolls; there are arguments, include a strong one recently by a very smart Dem-leaning political analyst, Tom Schaller, who believes the black vote is pretty maximized already in the South.

BIG OIL & THE MOTIVATION TO GO INTO IRAQ
Given that Exxon, Shell & other big oil companies are back in Iraq for the first time since the early 1970s, and given the Bush-Cheney lineage in the oil industry, do you believe their decision to go to Iraq was impacted by the financial benefit to the pocketbooks of their friends and themselves? What other facts do you have about their role in re-opening Iraq to American oil companies? -cranegirl

Regardless of what I think, it's clear many in the public believe we wouldn't be in Iraq if it weren't for our dependence on foreign oil. The role of American oil companies in Iraq is tricky politically since on one hand, I think many Americans would like to see Iraq's oil pay for the war and they certainly want Americans controlling this; on the other hand, we as a country don't like war profiteering.

Mr. Todd:

On Tim Russert's last "Meet the Press," he introduced you and the rest political team as "the best in the buisness." I hear lines like these all the time, but this was different. It wasn't a sales pitch that was thought up by marketers: he really believed it. He loved the work you guys did. We all love the work you guys do at NBC, Tim will continue to be proud. Our prayers will continue to be with you and the NBC family.

My question to you is what effect will the down ticket elections have on the presidency of Obama or McCain? Surely Democrats will gain seats, will that make it easier/tougher on Obama/McCain? -jfunk

Thanks for the kind words. Obviously, if McCain wins while Democrats gain seats in the House and Senate, it's going to send a message that the country wants bipartisan change; they want compromise, and a lot of it. McCain, to be successful, will have to be conciliatory on some big issues. Obama's tightrope if he wins with a big mandate via House and Senate pickups is to not believe it's a personal mandate but realize it's the country sending a message to Bush and the Republicans. If he comes into the presidency believing he walks on water and that the Dem Congress wouldn't be there if he hadn't won, he'll have a very, very short honeymoon.

Chuck,
With talk of a cross-party ticket, I would like to know how this is done within the party. For example, if Chuck Hagel were to run with Barack Obama, would he have to switch party? Is it possible for someone to run on the ballot of one party and keep their affiliation with another? Would the Republicans have to approve? Can someone be kicked out of a politcal party without their consent? -Shmadam Daniel

I think Hagel would have to change his party registration; Not 100% sure on this one and in fact, you've sparked an idea. I think our crack team of political researchers needs to triple check this. Because I think for many states, ballot access requires the person to be of a particular party to be on the ballot.

Hello Mr. Todd I have hear that Mr.Obama and Mr. McCain are going to go abroad on trips to further their wanting to be president. My question, are any of them going to to Europe,specifically Germany and do they know of Edmund Stoiber? -carmendrivera

Obama's going to Europe later this month, but not McCain... I believe one of Obama's stops will be in Germany.

My Question: please pose this question to Barak Obama - Health Insurance is a good thing for those who know it would be beneficial to them. To those constituents who actively practice alternative and absolute spiritual healing (or herbal & radical dietary alternative remedies of healing) or any other successful means of remedy, other than conventional medicine, want to know just HOW they will be beneficiaries of your (Sen. Obama's) specific health plan.

Also, some feel that health insurance (politically) does not work to solve or resolve medical problems, but instead, supports the financial gains of a prescription drug industry which is profit hungry.

Insurance firms, some medical doctors and others who prescribe to such remedies perpetuate self-interests rather than foster old fashioned bedside manner.

It is my (very tested) opinion, that conventional western medicine is losing its validity, substance, success rate. People go to hospital, rarely to heal, but to die. Man made material and sometimes chemical answers to ailments & dis-ease are failing because they leave spiritual foundations out of their healing equations.

As a Christian Scientist (of 28 years) I can attest to the fact, first hand, that without a deepened and consecrated relationship with a higher power, healing just can not take place. Maybe temporarily; but never, permantly. Thank you. -Linda Seaton

Thank you for your thoughtful question; I do think health care and the cost of it and access to it will be major points of contention this fall.

What is your analysis of Obama's statement:

My plan fully closes the Enron loophole and restores commonsense regulation as part of my broader plan to ease the burden for struggling families today while investing in a better future,"

And how does his plan differ from what Bart Stupak is trying to accomplish with bills H.R. 594 and H.R. 6346 (btw, 6346 was blocked [six votes short of the two-thirds majority required to pass the bill] last week by House Republicans). -caltha-palustris

I am not fully briefed on the two House bills you are referring to but I think Obama's statement is referring to the speculation issue regarding oil prices. There are a lot of folks who are wondering if speculation has caused this rise in oil prices which in turn causes energy prices on everything to go up. Considering what Enron did in California, it's no wonder this has got some folks worked up.

Background
I had to make a decision yesterday, between going to the emergency room or not having to spend the next several months income on paying for the ER visit. I have insurance, I am self insured but that doesn't seem to be enough for local hospitals. Several months back I cut my finger while making a salad. It wouldn't stop bleeding, it was at night and my local doctor was closed, so I ended up at the ER getting stitches. They seemed to charge by the minute and made me wait several hours before completing stitches and showing me the door. I ended up paying nearly $600.00 dollars for a couple of stitches even with insurance. The hospital near me is "out-of-network".

That made me pause yesterday, I was at my local doctor for chest pains and she sent me to the ER for tests she could not perform. Having the recent bad experience with the ER I actually fought my doctor about going. Consider, I was having chest pains! The health care system is so messed up I actually was more worried about paying the bill than the possibility that I was having a heart attack!

Question
Chuck, can you ask these candidates if they are going to address the quality of health insurance and not just the access or cost? I have health insurance and all these out of network or non covered costs are not making me feel healthy or feel I can trust doctors and hospitals to apply my health insurance in time of need.

Yesterday I did not have a heart attack, I was having muscle spasms in my chest related to seasonal allergies I didn't know I had. But thinking about the bills that are coming is enough to give me one.
-Pacific Northwest Blogger

I think you bring up a point on health care that is not debated as widely and that is quality and access. I think plenty of folks have insurance but a good number don't believe they have enough insurance. And that's part of the philosophical debate that Obama and McCain will have on health care. The two have very different ways of getting to the goal of universal access.

Hi Chuck, when poll results are presented for the question "Does race affect your choice for president", the pundits always interpret this as racism (i.e. whites who won't vote for Obama because he is African-American).

But we know that there are a SIGNIFICANT number of people who are voting for him BECAUSE HE IS AFRICAN-AMERICAN (i.e. other African-Americans).

How much do you think this plays into those poll numbers and why is this not discussed by the media? -BLDZ

Great observation and something we in the media aren't talking about. That said, when looking at the cross tabs, those that say race matters are voting in greater numbers against Obama than for him. But we should be careful about it.

Hi Chuck,

Are there not many problems with McCain putting Romney on the ticket? They viciously attacked each other's character and stances on the issues in the primary season. Also, wouldn't Romney's perceived flip-flopping on all sorts of issues go against McCain's "straight talk" theme? -mjs6288

I think disagreements during primaries are always overblown by us in the media. If the political benefits out-weigh the costs (and I think they do), then McCain will pick Romney.

Hi Chuck,

I hope you can address the issue of why the news anchors and pundits are taking General Clark's comments about Senator McCain's military service out of context and saying that Clark questioned McCain's patriotism or impugned McCain's military service?

It's amazing that the media insiders have not read or heard the whole interview and are falsely accusing Clark of saying or implying something that he did not!

I hope you will not be afraid to call out your media colleagues on this gross misinterpretation of Clark's comments! -Mary Ann-360047

I think we're reacting as much to Obama's reaction to Clark's comments as we are to McCain's reaction. The fact is Clark was inartful in the point he was trying to make; they guy can be clumsy when it comes to playing the political game.

Everywhere we turn, the venom in politics exaggerates and inflates. The Congress seems powerless to do anything but compromise. Where can we voters get the laundry list of issues addressed, in detail, by both candidates ? As a nurse of more than 50 years, the current health care system needs to be addressed with an emphasis on preventive care and wellness. There is a need for all concerned parties (public and private) to address a multitude of associated issues. Why is this important issue (and others) consdered the 3rd rail in a political year ? -Audrey Valley

Well, considering the age of the country's population, i think more political leaders realize they need to address this issue. And I suspect if the president and Congress don't next year, they'll be punished by the voters.

Strategically speaking - what do you think of the fact that the Democrats will have to announce their VP choice a week before the Republicans? Do you think the Republicans will wait and make their final decision based on who Sen. Obama chooses? Do you think this is a disadvantage to the Democrats? On another note - I just love you. I feel like I've spent the last few months in a relationship with you (on MSNBC!) with this extended primary! Looking forward to an exciting election - although I'll miss Tim Russert for sure... -stephanie-361595

McCain has so few advantages in this election, I think he'll take any he can get and being able to respond to Obama's VP pick and potentially stepping on Obama's convention bump by announcing his VP pick that weekend between the two convos.

Chuck,

It seems relevant and germane to have discovery on McCain's full veteran records as well as his wife's finances. Why is this kept out of the discussion. Does this make sense? -Clara Kansas City, MO

I think we'll see calls for more on those records; it's inevitable.

the media has placed the Obama's under the microscope assuming that we know the McCains,which alot of people do not. Especially the new young voters. Its fair game to cover the McCains backgroung. That McCain broke his marriage vow of , for better or for worse, by leaving his crippled wife for Cindy, says alot about his charterer and people need to know about that! -Trish Stelten

I'm guessing the country will learn more about McCain's pre-Senate days as the campaign wears on; but I don't think there's much in his past that will dramatically change the perception of McCain with voters; ditto with Obama.

Chuck,
Does Obama really have a realistic shot of winning traditionally republican states like Georgia, Montana, ans Alaska, or is he wasting his money running ads there, since McCain knows he has a lock on those states? -Hoya

AK is possible simply because the GOP brand in the state is at an all-time low. Dems could win a senate and house seat in the state because of the perception that both incumbents have gone TOO washington. So it's possible something's afoot in Alaska. GA, I've described above in another thread today about how I think it COULD be in play. Montana? Not sure, I think if Obama runs a campaign that's unchallenged by McCain, then sure, he could pick off the state; I think McCain or the GOP runs a gun campaign against Obama, he'll lose the state.

Why would voters flock to McCain if there is another terrorist attack? Seems to me that, if the attack has already occured, McCain could do no more than Obama except plunge us into another war with those who we are already at war with. Let's take this fear out of the equation. -chuck long

I think it depends on the attack, where it came from etc. I don't think it's a slam dunk that somehow terrorist-attack=rise in McCain's poll numbers; it all depends on the circumstances of the attack.

Mr. Todd, I would like to know more about the situation with John McCain's first wife. I'm sure it was covered in another primary but I was not interested in primaries in the past and only paid attention in the general elections. The few things I've found and read have been horrible and I'd like to know the truth. No one doubts his service to the country but aren't morals important too? Is it true that he left his first wife because she was disfigured and that he had an affair with Cindy McCain while he was still married? If not then what is the truth?
If so, how does he explain this? It may not matter to others but it does to me. I want an honorable man in the White House. His service record does not cover everything. -want correct info

It's pretty tough to have a he said-she said story if there is no she said and everything I've learned about McCain's first wife is that she's still very fond of him and that the two have a very respectful relationship. So if it's not an issue for her, I doubt it'll be an issue for voters.

Hey Chuck Todd! What counties does Obama need to win in order to win OH? By how much votes should he win?

One advantage is that Ted Strickland (D) can help Obama out on that state right?

Love your analysis by the way on MSNBC!! You are great! -Rod-362256

You want to go county-by-county in Ohio? I love it... Well, I think the basic strategy the Obama folks ought to take is to look at the Kerry map in the state and the Sherrod Brown victory map in '06 and target every county Brown won and Kerry didn't very heavily; Approx. 20-25 county difference. GOV races are not as good blueprints for presidential races because voters vote the person over party more often on the GOV level than they do the SEN level.

Chuck T,
Silly question,(S)
If this ends in a tie and it goes to the house
any chance some blue states might actually vote for mccain if he wins the popular vote?
And who would be Mccain and Obama's replacement in the senate when one of them wins? -Nick-az

Sure, I think that's very possible. Right now, Dems control 27 House delegations which translates into 27 votes (remember, one vote per state if the race goes to the House) but some of those states, like SD, could vote McCain; or like DE (GOP control) could vote Obama... very tricky politics. I think if it's 269-269 and the House has to decide; there will be a near unanimous decision to support the guy who won the nat'l popular vote in order to avoid a major voter backlash and potential instability.

As for Senate replacements: AZ has a low that states the GOV must appoint someone from the same party... as for IL, my guess is the AG, Lisa Madigan.

Why do the Democrats tolerate Joe Lieberman? He is going to speak at the republican convention but caucuses with the Democrats. He has been an attack dog for McCain. Isn't it time someone put him in his political place? -Ira Lapin

Well, does Obama want to be the guy who heads a party that says they don't want Lieberman as a member? Just askin'

Chuck,

I have been in many message boards either as a participator or just as an observer. I am a Baby Boomer (young fifties!) and the one thing I am told the most by people in their late teens, twenties and thirties is to "hurry up and die since my life is over anyway." They are referring to the Social Security issue and they have told me personally, that I am the reason this country is deteriorating.

My question is, are they right and why? My husband and I are losing our home, we've had to sell most of our possessions and we've lost all of our savings due to an unscrupulous man. I've been trying to find work for a few years but companies want young faces. My husband works but because of our situation, he won't retire until he turns seventy. What we will have when we decide to retire is his small pension plus our social security.

Have either candidate made Social Security a priority so I will stop getting death threats?

By the way, I have not made up my mind who I will vote for in the November election. -Susan from Oklahoma

Neither candidate will talk rationally about social security because they fear that the other side would demagogue the issue. Clearly, the fact that we're all living longer is having an effect on our gov't's ability to support seniors. It's a fact. So what's the best way to get things solvent; it seems that something's got to give: either a tax hike, some privatization or a raise in the retirement age; none are popular. But hey, they are asking to be president, not popular, right?

Chuck only you can explain this, why is America still not taking advantage of HEMP SEED BIOFUEL. ITs renewable, easy to grow, and based of DEA statistics, Marijuana is the #1 cash crop in America, so why have we not looked into this further? Its cost BILLIONS to get a oil rig online, but only a fraction of the cost to produce hemp seed oil, why wont we pursuit something so easy to generate? -Anthony Recendez

I think we're getting to the point on energy that EVERYTHING will be on the table, including hemp; but we still may be a ways away because of the stigma (which may or may not be justified; not judging on this one) attached to supporting the idea.

Just want to tell you that you are doing a terrific job; I watch you almost every day at some time or another. I cannot find anywhere on the Morning Joe page to post a comment so you are my only hope.
Just watched the clip with Bob Herbert on the economy. It is very logical and true. But I'd like to know why Pat Buchanan was trying to attack Obama (like this economy is his fault or will be) to Bob Herbert when Bob was just logically explaining the correlation between the on-going war and the economy??
Seems to me, Pat should be more careful before he places blame!! -carol-309886

Oh, I wouldn't assume Pat was attacking Mr. Herbert; I think Pat likes to play devil's advocate.

Chuck, can we completely rule out race as a reason why this election is polling so closely? It seems Obama's team is running a great campaign and the Republicans are basically the evil empire in America right now, yet it is so close. I've heard all the "McCain's a different kind of Republican" arguments, but I can't believe it considering the gaffs he's making and his promise to carry on Bush's failed policies. I can't understand any other reason it is so close. So, aside from "McCain's a rebel" why else would this election be polling so close? OR is there something to the "young-voters-and-African-Americans-aren't-being-polled-properly-because-they-are-not-considered-likely-voters" argument? I'm at a loss. -Bill F

I think McCain's brand which has been built over years, not months like Obama, is helping to keep this close; and I think Obama's relative inexperience is more of a problem for him than his race.

Seems like anything Obama, a surrogate or just a supporter says gets parsed down to the last syllable. McCain can mis-speak, manufacture controversy, flip-flop until we get wiplash and even take credit for legislation he voted against (e.g. the Webb GI Bill). His surrogates have lied about Obama's religion, made racist remarks and run racist ads. They are currently in the process of attempting to swiftboat him. No one in the media calls McCain on it.....ever. Why? Being a war hero does not make him immune from criticism from the media. -Ira Lapin

I don't think it's as bad as you describe but remember, frontrunners always get more scrutiny... whether in politics or sports or life.

The DNC leadership wants the veep to be catholic. Outside of Joe Biden and Tim Kaine, are there any other potential catholic candidates? What religion is Jim Webb? -m berry

I believe Sebelius is Catholic. As is Dodd and Kerry; Webb is a Methodist... I think... Almanac of AMerican Politics says only that he's a "Christian"

Chuck why is Obama for the cal. same sex marriage? It says is't wrong in the Bible. I am a Christian
and I wonder why he would support this. What do you think? -rodandchristy2003@yahoo.com

I don't think Obama's come out for it directly... I believe he's trying to be against it and for it... frankly, both presidential candidates are struggling with the California decision.

Chuck : John Mc Cain rs the free trade agreement that is being discussed. I believe he stated this the other day in Pa. How can he with the loss of jobs? -steve-362301

McCain is unabashed in this; Obama's position on trade isn't as clear; at his core, I think he's a free-trader like McCain but he knows that his voting base is not as fond of free trade as he is... so he's trying to be responsive. We're going through a very rough transition re: globalization.

What do you think the paradigm will be for each of the presumptive nominees in terms of their vice-presidential selection? Specifically, do you think that either John McCain or Barack Obama are leaning toward a selection based on: 1) Conventional characteristics, like geography, experience (in the case of Obama), age (in the case of McCain), etc.; 2) An outside-the-box method (someone from the business world, someone of another Party, etc.); 3) Someone who will be completely unobjectionable; or 4) Another paradigm entirely? -Alexander T.

I think Obama is looking at optino 3 and that McCain is looking more at option 2.

Chuck,

Last night Andrea Mitchell pointed out how much the "swift boaters" have donated to McCain's campaign. Any idea how much Obama has received from the parishioners of Trinity United and MoveOn.org? -SouthernDem

Moveon has given a lot to Obama... not sure on Trinity... tough thing to figure out. Can't search someone's religious affiliation on the FEC... thought one could take a Trinity membership list and then do a search.

Do the United State wont a person with a temper like McCain ,figure on the trigger? -Gordon Howard

America loved Harrison Ford on Air Force One, right? I think it depends on the situation.

Mr. Todd,
I'm considering a 2010 Congressional Run in Texas 6th District. Do you have any advice? -Rodney Hopper

If you've never run for office, don't be discouraged if you lose the first time you run... Ted Strickland lost three races for Congress before he won... Bush and Obama both lost races for Congress before they went on to bigger and better things.

And start early... become an activist inside your party of choice and meet folks individually... don't forget a name and a face and personally write notes to people who can help you. If there is one thing I'd think about it: remember, politics is about the personal, particular on the local level.

Mr. Todd,

Can you please give us your thoughts on an Obama/Landrieu 2008 ticket? Do you think this can help knock down Bobby Jindel's (Republican) appeal in Louisiana and can Senator Landrieu help deliver 9 electoral votes to the Obama campaign from the South?

No matter what anyone says, you can't win the presidency without the south...right? -Michael GB -Michael A. Gill-Branion

Landrieu has a tough re-election fight on her hands for that senate seat; I doubt Obama will pick a woman not named Clinton; I think Clinton supporters would find that offensive and upsetting; Also, Landrieu is considered pro-life on the abortion issue and that could be a problem at the convention.

Sen. Thad Cochrane, R-Miss., referring to a trip to Nicaragua, told a Biloxi newspaper, "I don't know what had happened to provoke John [McCain], but he obviously got mad at the guy ... and he just reached over there and snatched ... him."

McCain's temper has been mentioned before but never to the point that he has become violent. As a vet, I've seen this behavior before....in PTSD patients. How can a man with this temperament be trusted as POTUS? -Ira Lapin

Be careful of this allegation; I have my doubts where McCain could have physically done what Sen. Cochran said he did. Sure, McCain had a bad temper at one time, something he admits; but many folks, even opponents, say he's mellowed over the years.

Hey Chuck,

Can you confirm this...I have heard that Obama really is down to Bayh, Biden, and Hillary Clinton for his VP and will probably announce right before the Olympics. Note Hillary is third but is a emergency pick if things look bad by then.

Also is John McCain down to a few and will he pick among those few based on who Obama picks..example..if Obama picks Hillary then McCain will pick a centrist independent and if he doesn't pick hillary then one of his woman candidates?

Also any possibity that Obama might also announce his major cabinet picks before election -Sudesh Kudchadkar

A lot of folks would like to see Obama announce cabinet picks early but it doesn't look like he's going to do that... but we'll see... as for your short list, I don't think Hillary's on it, but I do believe the other two are.

Why is the mainstream media not investigating and reporting on The Mc Cain Property tax debacle?- And letting Bush get a pass on the quote in his news conference that paraphrasing- McCain,helped pass the GI education bill when it is wdely known that Mc Cain was opposed to it?
?. -Diane Gould

Could be lack of interest due to the holidays but don't assume these issues won't pop back up.

What will Obama's effect be on down ticket races in states in the deep South? Does his canidacy put states like Mississippi, Georgia or Louisianain play (if not for himself, for Democratic house and senate candidates)? What are your thoughts -sam-alfred-brown

I don't know if Obama can put MS and LA in play but I think he could help spur a larger than normal African-American turnout that helps senate and house candidates in those two states. GA, though, he might, just might, put in play.

Polls schmolls. Seem like we get a new poll just about every hour. What other measures do political junkies use to amuse and prognosticate with between now and the big day?

My husband and I feel that the campaign stores are a barometer of who's doing well. We've been waiting for 3 months for a popular Obama shirt that is constantly on backorder, but it seems like we could have taken fast delivery of any item we wanted from the McCain or Clinton campaign stores.

Enjoy! -SKGyB

I look at previous results and census data as much as anything else these days. Also, don't forget the bureau of labor statistics... those statewide numbers might tell us something as well. And then there's voter registration stats.

Hi Chuck,

Ok... I'm making the call, Obama's Cabinet; tell me what you think.

Chief of Staff - Alexrod
VP - Mccaskill. State - Richardson
Defense - Biden/W. Clark
Treasury - Rendell
Attorney Gen. J. Edwards
National Security - R. Clark -Thomjo4018

Chief of Staff - Alexrod (he won't take a WH job; knows Rove made a mistake and Carville did the right thing; look for Daschle in this role) VP - Mccaskill (not sure on this one... she's been in the senate for fewer years than Obama). State - Richardson (possibly; Biden or Lugar are my picks)
Defense - Biden/W. Clark (how about Clinton?)
Treasury - Rendell (He might keep Hank Paulson... or pick Bloomberg)
Attorney Gen. J. Edwards (agree)
National Security - R. Clark (Danzig is my guess)

Is there any chance that members of the Bush administration can be prosecuted criminally after the 20th of January? Does executive privilege go with the exiting President or does it expire? -Ira Lapin

I don't believe executive privelege expires.. but I'm not a legal expert.

Hi Chuck,

How much of a role does numbers in the House and Senate play in a President deciding what his cabinet will look like? For example, in RI we have a very popular Senator in Jack Reed. Although he would make an outstanding Secretary of Defense, the fear is that our Republican Governor would replace Senator Reed with a Republican.

Are these positions often denied to certain people based on the make up of Congress and whether or not they can be replaced by a member of the same party? -Mikemann99

depends on the makeup of the Senate... and the party of the president... sometimes a lot; it's about who can be confirmed and sometimes it's not a big deal.

Hi Chuck,
McCain has stated that if he's elected president that he's going to put a hold on discretionary spending by the government. As a federal employee [whose not management or a policy maker], what do you think his specific plans are? Will he just look at the Executive Branch or will he include the Legislative Branch [where I work]? -Scot C.

i think it's a smaller freeze than you realize... non-discretionary spending is the problem according to many budget experts

Hi Chuck, I like Biden for VP and think he would bring the Foriegn Policy experience. Why is he not being mentioned much? Is it because he is not from a swing State? -Walter Brown

i think BIden's the frontrunner right now actually

Todays WSJ editorial questions if Barack Obama has changed his liberal values so often in the past few weeks, he is sounding often more like President George Bush! Wow. How is one to know the true values and positions of either candidate if they keep changing based on polls and public opinion. Flip flopping watching seems to be more popular than baseball these days. -Jeff Strashun

campaigns do strange things to candidates... both candidates have appeared to, um, "evolve"

I have written before about McCain choosing Phil Gramm to basically be the President of the economy since McCain knows so little. I think with the economy the way it is Obama can point a finger at the one Man most responsible for the mess we are in. Not to mention that he is a lobbyist for a foriegn bank. I think this will be a big story. Do you? -Walter Brown

I think Gramm has a lot of influence with McCain and if he's president, Gramm will be either Treas. Sec. or appointed to the fed

Amidst the (perhaps inevitable) steady stream of banal political banter of the last few weeks, including the recent issue of McCain's war record, was Roger Cohen's provocative NYTimes op-ed piece "Why Obama Should Visit a Mosque"

He says he thinks it would verify Obama's intellectual honesty and potentially "break the cycle" of "fear-mongering about Islam" that has become "a global industry."

I heard Cohen say on on someone's show that he honestly didn't think Obama will do so but wishes he would.

For various reasons, this proposal seems to go straight to the heart of the Great Change that many of us have in mind in backing Obama. After all: Who is included in the US of "bring US together"? Anyone excluded? -Dale Woodiel

Obama is very afraid of the Muslim rumors... whether he should be is another question but the fact is, he is... I don't expect to see him at a mosque anytime soon.

is there any chance of obama pickin colin powell as vp -jeffroz

change? sure... likely? no

Everyone seems to think that the western states will be the determining factor in the new electoral map the Obama campaign envisions. If Obama just wins the traditional democratic states (the Gore, Kerry states) and one or two others now in play due to large their large African-American population, he wins. Can it be this simple or am I missing something? -Ira Lapin

I think it's that simple actually... it's about expanding the map, something Kerry and Gore couldn't do

Hi Chuck,

Just to follow up on Diane's question, why is the press all over a non-story like Obama's mortgage interest rate (he had good credit for goodness sake!) but not covering the fact that the McCain's didn't pay taxes on one of their properties for four years. It just seems like media bias to me -Gary Good

i think both stories are getting similar coverage... attention but not too much so

Obama is a constitutional scholar, lawyer and professor. His current position on telecom immunity under the new FISA legislation would give credence to the Bush administration desecration of the fourth Amendment. On faith based initiatives: Our founding fathers went to great lengths to separate church and state, making it part of the Bill of Rights. They made it clear that they did not want religious zealots infringing on the duties of government. This initiative seems to be in in clear violation. Doesn't this undermine his claim that he is a change candidate? Seems like this is normal political pandering. -Ira Lapin

I think Obama does need to worry about looking, um, TOO pragmatic.

Hey Chuck

i have a general question about polling... I have noticed that you never show a IVR poll on MSNBC (e.g. Rasmussen Reports, Survey USA)... I know that there is a lot of talk about the fact that they don't use live interviewer... However they seems to be very accurate (at least in the primaries)... What's your opinion on IVR polls??

Thanks a lot

Coni, Student from Switzerland -caviezel

Their track records are mixed... sure, they poll more which means they have a better chance of getting it right at least one time; but every state has nuance; And while I think Survey USA is trying to be scientific about what they do and react to the unique natures of different electorates, I do not have the same confidence yet in Rasmussen; both pollsters show incredibly fluctuations in their results. ONe day, a candidate will have a massive lead and two weeks later, their numbers will change for no apparent reasons. They churn out the most numbers and have too much influence. If campaigns thought the IVR way of polling was the way to go, they'd already be there; because it's VERY cheap; but the fact is the polling I trust the most is from pollsters who get paid to get it right, not to get a result

VP - H.Clinton ( I'm sorry but 18 million Votes is 18 million Votes this Is a democracy correct Sec of State - Biden Sorry but of all the Candidates he was the best qualified to be President Sec OF Def - W Clark Smart Military and Supreme Allied Commander is a name that should get you a job anywhere. Atty Gen - J Edwards he will follow the law. Think of that concept -David Frazier

maybe so... if this were Britain; I imagine this would be the cabinet

NBC's Nightly News show, two nights ago, won the the William Randolph Hearst award for "yellow journalism." The blatant manner in which the producers cut out the context and continuity of General Clark's question and answer session, on the CBS Sunday morning show, was journalism at its worst. Was stunned that you and Bryan Wlliams would engage in such a dastardly manipulation. -Bill McG.

again, the reaction was Obama's, not ours; that's what made this a bigger story

Chuck,

What do you think of the Chicago press commentary about the national perception of Obama's connection to Daley and his politics? John Kass in particular continues to pound on this connection and the likelihood that Obama is tainted or obligated in ways that will compromise the presidency. Are any national muckrakers digging in on this looking for verification? Thanks for your enlightened comments on the air.

(sorry for the second post - I don't have access to the other mailbox during the day) -Rich-362494

I have wondered if Obama's Chicago past will become an issue; My guess is that it might... but Obama has kept a distance to date.

Why hasn't anyone mentioned Harold Ford as a possible VP selection? There is an obvious chemestry between him and Obama that is not apparent with other Democrats. Could that be because both are more intellectuals than politicians...or would 2 black men be more of a coup than an election? -ADB3

I think Harold's political future lies in TN; He's likely to run for GOV in 2010.

-----------------

Phew, I attempted to answer every question today; I had extra time before the start of the holiday weekend and since I wasn't here last week, I figured I owed it to you. So enjoy the extended comments; I'm no Bill Simmons when it comes to marathon online chats, but I aspire to be... see you next week.

You did one heck of a job and put in yeoman's effort. Thank you sir, well done and appreciated. Anyone who has tackled a thread this long knows what a commitment it takes to offer thoughtful replies. Hope your Fourth of July is a blast and you're well rested for another round!!! -Pamela Drew

------ Original Post ------

I'm Chuck Todd, NBC News Political Director. Please join me for another Q&A session here on Newsvine, on Wednesday, July 2 from 3:30-4:30 PM ET, where we'll be discussing U.S. Politics and the unfolding presidential election. Feel free to post your questions here in advance.

Also, due to the number of responses during my last Q&A, I'll likely only be able to answer the most popular submissions. So please remember to vote for your favorite questions by clicking the small arrow in each comment box.

For those of you visiting us here for the first time, please know that Newsvine is an interactive web site designed for members to participate in thoughtful discussions about news-related topics. Feel free to take a look at the Newsvine Code of Honor, it's a short list of standards that existing members hold themselves to here.