Michael_Kranish: Hello, this is Michael Kranish from the Boston Globe's Washington Bureau. I am happy to take your questions on the 2008 campaign. If you want to talk about my most recent stories, there are links to two of them on the left side of this page - one about Iowa and one about Fred Thompson. But all campaign topics are welcome.
howie: Who's gonna win?
Michael_Kranish: Of course no one knows who is going to win. That is what is making this race so interesting on both sides. While Mitt Romney leads in polls in the first two states, Iowa and New Hampshire, Rudy Giuliani leads nationally and others are picking up speed. Hillary Clinton is ahead on the Democrat side, but Barack Obama is hoping to catch fire in the early states. We are in for a fascinating race and the five days in January between the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary will be a crucial time.
johnson: Hi Michael, what do you make of Hillary Clinton supposedly losing ground in the Zogby poll? Do you buy it?
Michael_Kranish: Anytime we discuss polls at this time of the campaign, it is helpful to remember that these can be all over the map. I covered John Kerry in the last campaign and he was very low in the polls at this time and all but written off in Iowa and New Hampshire, yet he won both states and the nomination. So while it is worth looking at the polls for movement, it is far too early to draw conclusions. In a way, you might learn as much by looking toward the bottom of the polls, such as movement up by Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul, and try to determine why they gain some strength, and who they are pulling from. It might be as relevant as studying dips in the top tier. Huckabee, for example, has risen rapidly in Iowa and has made some progress in New Hampshire.
senormachera: I think Hillary is going to get all the female votes and her sex appeal and beauty will draw a large percentage of male voters, especially younger male voters who are more likely to vote based on thier attraction to her physcial qualities. this dynamic will be enough for her to win in a landslide. do you agree?
Michael_Kranish: Hillary Clinton hopes to benefit by noting that she would be the first woman president. For example, a story in today's Washington Post says that she has put "gender at the center of her candidacy." Nonetheless, her campaign would say there is far more to appeal than her gender. She is running on her experience, her qualifications and her background, and voters will have to look at the entirety of her candidacy in making their decisions.
wonton: Is it a two-man race for the GOP?
Michael_Kranish: No, it seems to be much larger than that. While Rudy Giuliani has been leading in national polls for quite some time, Mitt Romney's strength in Iowa and New Hampshire have made him into a top contender, and John McCain has shown new strength. Mike Huckabee could win or do very well in Iowa, while Fred Thompson remains in second place in some national polls. So the GOP is extraordinarily crowded and much will depend on how things go in the next few weeks, which is why Giuliani and Romney have been mixing it up more strongly in recent days.
ggooo: Hi Michael, loved your Thompson-Federalism article. But really, I think you're slightly wrong. I think we'll see him kow-tow to the Republican base on issues such as abortion and gun control, especially if he loses big in Iowa/N.H.
Michael_Kranish: Thanks for your comment. The chatter is referring to a story published on Sunday in which I noted that Fred Thompson is a strong proponent of federalism, wanting to leave most decisions to the states. I noted that some critics say Thompson is trying to have it both ways - saying he is anti-abortion, but leaving the decision on abortion to the states due to federalism. On the campaign trail, Thompson does present himself as anti-abortion and anti-gun control, so I don't see him having to change his positions, per se. Instead, he may have to explain further how he would balance his federalism while leaving some key issues that may be crucial to Republicans up to states.
nellie: I think Edwards is shooting himself in the foot with all his Hillary-bashing. His entire appeal was based on his positive energy (and good looks), now he's acting like Howard Dean. We know how that script ends.
Michael_Kranish: Thanks for the question. It is always a difficult balance for a candidate who wants to have a sunny outlook while also going after a leading opponent. But given his standing, he may feel he has no other choice. It is similar to the calculation about whether to go negative in ads. Voters typically say they don't like negative ads, but they often work and thus candidates continue to use them. Similarly, you are seeing Mitt Romney showing that he is more than willing to go after his opponents by name.
jutjutbee: Is Mike Huckabee for real? I'd never even heard of the guy, now he might win Iowa?
Michael_Kranish: This is a question that a lot of people may be asking, and it is what makes this early stage of political reporting so interesting. The Iowa polls indicate he is for real there, for what that is worth. He is not doing nearly as well in New Hampshire, but is hoping for the proverbial bounce from Iowa. There is a history here - Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and others coming from seemingly nowhere. This is why Iowa and New Hampshire continue to be so important - a lesser-known candidate can gain traction in a small state that probably couldn't happen if, say, California was first. Fred Thompson and others are now going after Huckabee, so this will attract more attention in the coming weeks. And more is being written about him.
ernie_els: Who do you think is the best golfer among the candidates? And could any of them beat bUSH?
Michael_Kranish: Well, I have to confess, I have no idea. I've never played golf. A campaign, however, is like a long walk with lots of hazards, so perhaps there is an analogy there worth pursuing...
Michael_Kranish: The chatter is referring to an item written by a Globe colleague, which quoted Rudy Giuliani as saying: "I would change the mission of the State Department...The main purpose of an ambassador is to sell the United States out of the State Department." Giuliani said he would "Speak softly and carry a big stick," the motto of Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th president.
Michael_Kranish: This might be interpreted as an implicit criticism of the Bush administration, but he didn't directly criticize Bush in his comments. So it would be interesting if Giuliani is asked about this directly in tomorrow's debate.
toady: What did you make of Rudy Giuliani's comments on the role of the State Dept.? How would you envision a Giuliani-run state department?
Michael_Kranish: Please note - I neglected to post the question, so here you have it following my answer.
ok_corral: I have a legitimate question: Every year, someone like Ron Paul, Gravel, Kucinich, etc. comes out, starts talking the truth, and everybody loves them......and they get clobbered in the primaries by some productized stuffed suit. Why won't anybody actually cast a vote for the Ron Pauls?
Michael_Kranish: Actually, it does seem like a sizable number of people will vote for Ron Paul; the question is, will it be enough for him to break through? Clearly, he has broken through various barriers of money, media attention and polling, more than many observers thought possible. Still, it take a lot to win - just ask Howard Dean. He seemed to have broken through many of the same barriers, and then blasted through another set to be deemed the likely nominee, but still didn't succeed.
i_am_dumb: What's the diff. between a caucus and a primary? And why does one state have a "convention"?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: A caucus is far more limited than a primary. The Iowa caucus will have a limited turnout at a specific time, so it relies heavily on activist voters who are willing to openly declare their preference. (It also makes polling harder in Iowa). By contrast, the New Hampshire primary is as open as it can possibly be - same day voter registration, same day party registration, and so on. There are a variety of different rules about how delegates are selected in different states, which relates to your question about a state convention.
Greg: Does John Edwards still have the strongest ground organization in Iowa, and how much do you think that will pay off as it comes down to the wire?
Michael_Kranish: I haven't covered Edwards in Iowa, so I can't honestly answer, but I can say that organization is huge in Iowa, as I indicated in my prior response. A candidate has to make sure committed voters go to the caucus meetings on a cold evening in early January - the very definition of what a ground organization can do. The organization relies on very committed people who will continually hit the pavement for their candidate, talking to neighbors and strangers.
ulm: What do you think of the primary process? Doesn't it give "nobody" states like Iowa and N.H. undue influence into determining the next president?
Michael_Kranish: Fair question, and one I've asked - and been asked - ever since I started covering the New Hampshire primary for the Globe many years ago. It does give these states outsized influence. Whether that is fair or not is another question. The parties have allowed it to continue, and the political leaders in both states have done everything to make sure it continues. Still, the system is changing, with more states getting earlier and earlier. The advocates would say it allows lesser-funded candidates to gain traction in a small state, while critics would note that both states are small and predominantly white and less reflective of the country. Winning in NH, by the way, is not a guarantee of victory - as John McCain found out after winning the primary in 2000. Still, he is betting a major part of his campaign on New Hampshire (and he is not expected to do well in Iowa).
bcal92: Do you think that Democratic primary voters might vote strategically in the primary and migrate away from Hillary, similar to the movement away from Dean and towards Kerry in '04?
Michael_Kranish: Interesting question, and it is hard to answer at this point. This may be relevant in New Hampshire if voters believe Hillary Clinton is the inevitable nominee. If that scenario develops, a Democrat-inclined voter might cast a ballot in the Republican primary. A certain number of voters won't want to "waste" their vote, while others will vote for a candidate no matter what chance the candidate has.
Michael_Kranish: Well, chatters, that's it for today. Thank you for your interesting questions and we'll see you again online.
