Sens. McCaskill & Thune on "Fox News Sunday"

CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: I'm Chris Wallace and this is "Fox News Sunday."

Barack Obama's world tour -- did the Democrats shake off the inexperience label? How effective was John McCain in trying to get some of the spotlight? We'll ask key supporters and possible running mates for both -- Senator John Thune, who backs McCain, and senator Claire McCaskill, who supports Obama.

Then, where does the race for the White House stand now? We'll get the latest in the battle for electoral votes from the architect of two presidential victories, Karl Rove.

Also, the "veepstakes" -- with the conventions looming, how close are the candidates to picking their running mates? We'll ask our Sunday gang - - Brit Hume, Mara Liasson, Bill Kristol and Nina Easton.

And our Power Player of the Week is still asking...

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

BEN STEIN: Bueller? Bueller?

(END AUDIO CLIP)

WALLACE: ... all right now on "Fox News Sunday."

And hello again from Fox News in Washington. Well, with Barack Obama back last night from his trip across the Middle East and Europe, it's time to review where the presidential campaign stands now.

For answers, we turn to two key supporters who are both on the list of possible running mates -- Senator John Thune, who supports McCain, and Senator Claire McCaskill, who's backing Obama.

And welcome back to "Fox News Sunday."

THUNE: Nice to be with you, Chris.

MCCASKILL: Hi, Chris.

WALLACE: Obama's trip highlighted the differences between him and McCain on Iraq, especially on the question of the troop surge. And here's how McCain described that difference this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCAIN: I had the courage and the judgment to say that I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Senator Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Senator McCaskill, what did you think of that comment?

MCCASKILL: I think it's a little over the top. And frankly, I think John McCain knows it's over the top. Barack Obama has had a very constant and consistent message on Iraq, and that is in order to keep our nation secure, we have to have a broader view. It's not just about what's going on in Iraq.

And the interesting thing is the American people agree with him. The Iraqi people agree with him. This week we learned that the leader of the Iraqi government agrees with him. And even President Bush is beginning to sound like he's ready for a timetable for us to get out of Iraq.

At this point, only John McCain is out there almost by himself in terms of the leadership of the two countries.

WALLACE: Senator Thune, we're going to get to this question of timetables in a minute, but I want to go back to that statement.

McCain is saying and has repeated that, in effect, Obama is putting his own personal political ambition over the nation's security. Whatever happened to the politics of civility?

THUNE: Well, John McCain has his own way of saying things, but I think he was putting a fine point, Chris, on this pattern that Senator Obama has of making decisions that are predicated on political conditions back here at home rather than security conditions on the ground in Iraq. And I think what you saw this week were some examples of that.

And I don't -- I think his positions have been anything but consistent. He is evolving now -- there's a story as we speak running right now that Senator Obama is now saying that any residual force that's left in Iraq will be based upon security conditions on the ground, the very exact position that Senator McCain has been taking for some time.

And I think that it points to a lack of judgment and experience when it comes to dealing with these types of important issues.

And Senator McCain's leadership on this issue -- going out, supporting the surge -- Senator Obama opposed it, opposed funding it, and as recently as this week had a hard time explaining to people why he couldn't be for it even though he acknowledged the great results and progress that it's achieved.

WALLACE: Senator McCaskill, that's exactly where I wanted to go with you. Obama said on this trip that even knowing what he does now, he still would have opposed the surge 18 months ago. Here's how he explained it. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: You don't know what would have happened if I -- if the plan that I put forward in January 2007 to put more pressure on the Iraqis to arrive at a political reconciliation, to begin a phased withdrawal -- what would have happened had we pursued that strategy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Why can't Obama just admit he was wrong about the surge?

MCCASKILL: Well, first of all, he has said that he salutes the troops and our military leaders for what they have done tactically.

But in terms of a strategy, you know, he was against this war when it was not politically expedient to be against the war. He was against this war when, in fact, it was politically difficult to be against this war. He has been constant.

We have two mindsets. One is let's get out as carefully and as quickly as we can. The other is let's stay regardless of what the Iraqi government says, regardless of what the American people want and regardless, Chris, of the other considerations around the globe.

WALLACE: But, Senator McCaskill, let's look at what Obama said on January 10th, 2007, and we're going to put it up. That's the night that President Bush announced the surge.

"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse." Clearly, the surge didn't hurt. It helped.

MCCASKILL: Well, we -- first of all, there are some things about the surge that did help, but there were other considerations, Chris, as John McCain freely admits.

The fact that the Sunni "awakening" occurred up in Anbar -- that happened before the surge, and that was a key ingredient to the additional security that we see in Iraq.

WALLACE: Let me just ask a simple question. Did the surge help?

MCCASKILL: I think the surge helped, but it wasn't a silver bullet, because you know what? We've got more troops in now than we had before the surge. We're still borrowing $2 billion a week from China. We still do not have the troops we need in Afghanistan.

We still have domestic needs that are going unmet because of this myopic view and the fact that we're pinned down in Iraq. And Barack Obama is going to get us out of there. John McCain will not.

WALLACE: Senator Thune?

THUNE: Well, I think that what you have to make here, Chris -- there is a critical distinction between ending a war and winning a war. And Senator Obama has been intent on ending a war no matter what the consequences.

Senator McCain has said consistently that we need to win this war, which is why he advocated the surge, which was an unpopular position in this town at the time, and we've seen now incredible gains, incredible results, all of which could be reversed if we don't do this right.

But I think if you look at the recent stories that have been out, it's been a remarkable success. Civilian casualties are down 80 percent. Senator Obama still refuses to acknowledge the basic fact of the success and result and progress and gains that have been made as a result of the surge.

WALLACE: On the other hand, Senator Thune, let's pick up on what Senator McCaskill pointed out. All sides do seem to be moving in the direction of Obama's timetable of getting combat troops out by 2010.

Prime Minister Maliki endorsed that idea this week. President Bush is talking about time horizons, when he refused to talk about dates, and let's take a look at what John McCain had to say about this question just on Friday. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCAIN: I think it's a pretty good timetable as we should -- or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Senator Thune, going -- isn't -- going forward, isn't there a consensus forming around the Obama timetable of 2010?

THUNE: I think what there's a consensus forming around, at least with Senator McCain, with General Petraeus, with a lot of the Iraqi leadership, is that it needs to be conditioned-based.

We wouldn't be having this discussion today were it not for the fact that John McCain, against a lot of popular and public opinion in this town, took the position that we needed to get additional troops on the ground and advocated for the surge.

The reason we're having...

WALLACE: But he wasn't even willing to talk about any timetable or any dates at all. Now he's saying 2010 sounds like a pretty good timetable.

THUNE: Well, I think -- I think the reason he's able to talk about that, the reason we're even having this discussion, and that Senator Obama can have this discussion, and that President Bush can have this discussion, is because it's been so successful.

And the conditions on the ground now permit a discussion about, OK, when can we start withdrawing U.S. troops. It has been a masterful success for our men and women in uniform. But more importantly, it gives us an opportunity now to actually talk about drawing down some of our troop levels there.

WALLACE: Senator McCaskill, what about this idea of conditions- based? How flexible is Obama about his 16-month timetable? Is it set in stone or are those basically -- 16 months -- goals?

MCCASKILL: As he has said over and over again, it is a goal. But he will set the mission as the commander in chief.

And you know, it's interesting, Chris, that his judgment on foreign policy seems to not only be leading the pack in terms of a timetable in Iraq, but also in Afghanistan.

And here you have him coming out and saying, "We've got to move more troops into Afghanistan. The threat is there. We took our eye off the ball. We must get 10,000 troops back in Afghanistan." And watch what happens. He makes that pronouncement, and everyone begins to coalesce behind his judgment.

I think what he has shown this week is not only does he have the judgment necessary, he also has the confidence to lead our nation on the global stage.

WALLACE: Let me ask you about another question of judgment, Senator McCaskill. Did Obama make a mistake in canceling his trip to visit the wounded soldiers at Landstuhl Medical Center in Germany?

Let's take a look first, before you answer, at the new television ad McCain has put out going after Obama.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NARRATOR: He voted against funding our troops, and now he made time to go to the gym but canceled a visit with wounded troops. It seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras. John McCain is always there for our troops.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Senator McCaskill, the Pentagon says Obama could have visited those troops in the hospital at Landstuhl if had just gone by himself as a U.S. senator and not brought any campaign staff. Why didn't he do it?

MCCASKILL: Barack Obama chose to be on the Veterans Committee when he came to Washington. He could have been on any committee he wanted to be on.

He was the first senator to file the wounded warrior legislation to take care of our wounded at Walter Reed. He goes to Walter Reed, Chris, without cameras. He doesn't take cameras.

He made, I think, a very wise judgment when he decided once he left the congressional delegation part of his trip, it was a political trip. And he wanted to make sure that he never played political football with wounded soldiers. Now, the most disappointing thing about this ad is that it's beneath John McCain, because he's playing political football with wounded soldiers, and I think he's caught the disease that sometimes rages around here, and it's called "I'll say or do anything to be president," including an unnecessary character attack.

This is not fair to those wounded soldiers. Barack was told that because he was no longer on the congressional delegation part of his trip, it would be considered political, and there's a very bright line...

WALLACE: Well, no. He was told he could go by himself.

MCCASKILL: He could go by himself, but it would still be political because he was there as a candidate, not as a senator, and he wanted...

WALLACE: That's not what the Pentagon says, Senator.

MCCASKILL: Well, no. It was definitely political because he was -- the trip was being paid for by the campaign.

WALLACE: I understand, but they said his plane could land at Landstuhl and that -- or Ramstein and that he could go in by himself.

MCCASKILL: After the specter of the fact that he was politically campaigning at that point in time of the trip, after that was raised, he wanted to be ultra-cautious.

There is a bright line about using wounded troops for political purposes. And let me just tell you this, Chris. I'm confident of one thing. Had he gone, they would have criticized that. They would have said, "How dare he use wounded troops as a political prop?"

So no matter what he did -- it's like, you know, for months, "Go to Iraq." He goes to Iraq. "How dare he go to Iraq?" I mean, this is really the game that's being played and, frankly, it shows that the McCain campaign is having trouble.

WALLACE: Let's bring in the McCain campaign.

Senator Thune?

THUNE: Well, look. It was his first trip to Afghanistan. You talked about Afghanistan. McCain's been there four times. Senator Obama's never held a hearing on Afghanistan even though he chairs the relevant subcommittee.

And with respect to the trip to the military hospital, that could have occurred. He could have gone by himself. I mean, this was a flashbulb- type tour, a photo-op tour, if you will.

And if he had wanted to visit the troops, he certainly could have done that, and he could have done it without the entourage of press that was accompanying him. I think it is a distinction that can be made. Senator McCain, when he's traveled over there, has visited that hospital. I visited that hospital when I've been over there.

I think it's a -- it's an important point about this trip that people need to take into consideration when they evaluate the trip. You know, it's getting lots of great -- there was great photos, great imagery and that sort of thing, but at the end of the day, you had a trip where Senator -- David Petraeus disagreed with Senator Obama.

You had a trip where he was trying to explain why he couldn't now -- before the surge, even though it had been effective and worked, and you have a trip where he neglected to visit the -- our wounded warriors.

WALLACE: Let me ask you real quickly, because we're beginning to run out of time, respond, if you will, to Senator McCaskill's charge that it is McCain now who is using the wounded soldiers for politics.

THUNE: Oh, come on. I mean, get serious. John McCain has generations of service to this country. John McCain has sacrificed enormously, as has his family, for this country. To suggest for a minute that he is -- that just -- that is just -- is laughable.

I think the important point here is this is about judgment. It's about experience. It's about how you make decisions.

Senator Obama made a decision not to visit the military hospital, and I think people, when it comes to the election this fall, are going to evaluate these candidates based upon their judgment and based upon their experience.

WALLACE: All right. With the time left, we have to play the vice presidential game, because both of you have been mentioned by the, quote, "Great Mentioner."

Senator Thune, if John McCain asks you to be his running mate, what will you say?

THUNE: Hypothetical question. I'm not going to -- I'm not prepared to answer that question. I don't think that's going to happen. I think that you've looked at the...

WALLACE: But if he asks you, you'd say yes, wouldn't you?

THUNE: Well, obviously, you don't rule anything out in this profession. But it's certainly not anything I aspire to. I like the job I have. I'm trying to solve energy problems for the country right now in the United States Senate, which is...

WALLACE: Simple question, not a hypothetical -- have you been asked to turn over personal information to the campaign?

THUNE: I have not.

WALLACE: Senator McCaskill, if Obama asks you to run with him, what will you say?

MCCASKILL: Well, I'm honored to be mentioned. Let me tell you, I'm going to do something that people don't do around Washington very often. I think you're not supposed to do this. I think anybody in Washington would be thrilled to be asked to be vice president.

WALLACE: So you'd say yes.

MCCASKILL: Well, you know, I would like to meet somebody who wouldn't. If they're saying they wouldn't, I don't think that they are being as candid or as up front with the American people as probably they should be.

WALLACE: I hope you'll be as candid as Senator Thune was. Have you been asked to turn over personal information to the campaign?

MCCASKILL: I have not.

WALLACE: Finally, would it cause problems within the Democratic Party for Obama to pick any woman other than Hillary Clinton?

MCCASKILL: Oh, I -- you know, listen. Here's the bottom line. If you look at all the polling, the much vaunted problems that Obama was going to have with working-class people, with people that don't have a college education, with women, with Hispanics, you don't hear a lot of talking heads talking about those issues anymore because it's simply not true.

Hillary Clinton has done a wonderful job helping unite our party. She gets all the credit for doing the right things, saying the right things. I think we're going to be fine with women.

WALLACE: With or without Hillary Clinton.

MCCASKILL: With or without Hillary Clinton.

WALLACE: Senator McCaskill, Senator Thune, thank you both. Thanks so much for coming in. Please come back, both of you.

MCCASKILL: Thank you.

THUNE: Thanks, Chris.

WALLACE: Up next, we'll get a different perspective on the race for the White House as we survey the electoral landscape with master strategist Karl Rove. Back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WALLACE: For a different perspective on Obama's world tour and where the campaign stands now, we turn to the man behind two presidential election victories, Fox News analyst Karl Rove, who joins us from Nashville.

And, Karl, welcome back.

ROVE: Good morning.

WALLACE: First of all, your overview of Obama's trip -- did he shore up his credibility as a potential president and commander in chief?

ROVE: I think the short answer to that is we don't know. Every big event like this has pluses and minuses. And there are some things that he did that did shore up his standing.

For example, he was on the same world -- he was on the same stage with world leaders. There was the shot of him in the helicopter with Petraeus over Baghdad in the stories. And he clearly dominated the media with his world tour for, you know, more than a week.

He received a semi-endorsement from Maliki of this idea that U.S. troops could be brought out by the -- by 2010, though there is a big difference, I think, underneath the surface between Obama's view and Maliki's view.

And finally, he had these huge crowds in Germany. And those were all on the plus side, and that helped him.

On the other hand, he remains against the policy -- the surge -- that made success in Iraq possible, and I think that's hard to fathom. The dominant photograph of the opening stage of this world tour was him hitting a three-point shot in Afghanistan. I'm not certain that's the best image if you want to say, "I'm a world leader."

He had three tough interviews with Terry Moran, Katie Couric, Gibson - - they were all tough interviews. And the crowd was big, but it was in Germany, and he's running for president of the United States, not president of Europe.

And then finally, we had this dust-up over the visit to wounded troops, and there was also sort of a hint of arrogance. They demanded that they be -- that he be treated as a -- as the occupant of the White House, with White House rules.

And I think, frankly, finally, the speech in Germany, while it was soaring in its rhetoric, was actually, you know, somewhat vacuous. I mean, I'm not certain there was much "there" there. And he's received some criticism in the European press for it.

So on balance, I think, short-term plus, but potentially a long- term -- long-term, it might not make that big a difference for him.

WALLACE: I want to go back to the -- particularly the reception from the Europeans and that extraordinary crowd in Berlin -- 200,000, according to police reports.

Back in 2004, you and other Republicans went after John Kerry as being too continental, too European, in his sensibility. I talked to the Obama camp about that this week, and one of the top strategists said to me that they feel the country is way past 2004 and freedom fries and now would very much welcome European support.

Do you think playing well on the European stage helps or hurts Obama back here at home?

ROVE: You know, look. I don't -- I think they're misreading it. It worked in 2004 because John Kerry's sensibilities were so, you know, Francophile. I mean, you know, he was a European elitist.

Obama doesn't look that way. And frankly, though, going to Europe and putting the emphasis on this big crowd and the big event in Germany, and the dust-up, and "I want to speak at the same place that President Ronald Reagan and President John Kennedy spoke," I think that all had a note of disquietude to it.

It bespoke a little bit of arrogance and brashness, you know, sort of like, "I want the privilege that presidents had." But I don't think -- look. Americans like that their foreign -- that their leaders are liked by foreigners.

But more important to them than that is what do their leaders stand for. And you know, in 2004, Kerry was the stereotype -- I don't think Obama fits the stereotype yet -- of a -- you know, sort of a European- oriented American leader.

WALLACE: Let's talk about the practical political impact here at home. Some people thought with all of this massive coverage and some pretty powerful visual imagery that there would be a bump in the polls, but the early indications are that he hasn't gotten much of a bump nationally.

And I want you to take a look at these Quinnipiac swing state polls. In Colorado in the last month, Colorado has gone from Obama up five to McCain up two, Michigan from Obama plus six to plus four, Minnesota from Obama up 17 to up two, and Wisconsin from a 13-point Obama lead to an 11- point lead.

Why do you think, Karl, that both in swing states and nationally voters are not ready to jump aboard the Obama bandwagon, even despite all of this burst of publicity?

ROVE: Yeah. You caught a very interesting secular decline for Obama since roughly mid-June. In RealClearPolitics.com, it's down to a 4.8 percent race. And in the FiveThirtyEight.com tracking number, it's down to a two-point race.

I think there are three things here. One is the doubts about Obama's experience and fitness for the job. In March, I believe it was, ABC- Washington Post poll said 46 percent of the American people believe that he lacked the experience to be president.

He then spent $119 million between March and the end of June on his campaign, including a lot of advertising in key states, and at the end of June, Washington Post-ABC asked the same question again and the dial hadn't changed. Forty-six percent said that he lacked the experience and qualification to be president.

You normally find both candidates somewhere in the 60 percent to percent range on that question. Here's a guy who can't even bump 50 percent.

Second, McCain has strength among independents. In the Fox poll, independents are essentially split, 32 McCain, 34 for Obama and 34 undecided.

And there is resistance -- contrary to what Senator McCaskill said, there is resistance among Clinton Democrats. If you take again a look at the Fox poll, 86 percent of Republicans are for McCain. Only 75 percent of Democrats are for Obama.

Twenty-five percent of Democrats are either for McCain or undecided. That's a pretty big number to have at this point in the campaign.

WALLACE: I want to ask you about another thing that we saw in those Quinnipiac swing state polls. They found that there's one issue that is beginning to cut strongly for Republicans, and that is energy. By margins...

ROVE: Energy.

WALLACE: ... of 20 points to 30 points, voters are now saying that they support offshore drilling. How much could that help...

ROVE: Right.

WALLACE: ... McCain and hurt Obama?

ROVE: I think it's driving a big number for him, particularly among working-class blue-collar Democrats. Again, this is one of these interesting things. I wrote about this this week in the Wall Street Journal.

Look, every political candidate changes their mind. The key question is do you admit you changed your mind, did you share the new information that caused you to change your mind, and does it seem authentic, not calculating.

And John McCain reversed himself on drilling on offshore -- on the outer continental shelf and developing the oil shale in the Rocky Mountain states, and he said, "Look, $4-a-gallon gas has caused me to change my position."

Well, a lot of Americans, according to the polling data, have over the last several years, and particularly this year, begun to change their attitudes about expanded drilling off of our coasts and the development of the oil shale. And again, it's the same reason -- $4 a gallon gas.

So we have an emerging dialogue here, a difference on energy. We have McCain saying, "Drill more, use coal, expand alternatives -- wind, solar and exotics -- and let's conserve more and build more nuclear plants," and you have Obama saying, "Well, I agree with you about the alternatives, and I agree with you about conservation, but I'm against drilling more, I'm against nuclear plants, I want to tax coal, I want to tax natural gas, and I'm really down on developing any more additional coal-powered plants."

So you know, we've got a dialogue here that could end up working to McCain's advantage in a pretty powerful way.

WALLACE: Karl, let's look at the latest Rove electoral map. And what's interesting about this is that two weeks ago, you had Obama with 296 electoral votes, 270 needed to win the presidency.

And now, two weeks later, you have Obama dropping to 263 electoral votes. McCain hasn't picked up, but the toss-ups have. What's going on there?

ROVE: Right. Well, Ohio and New Hampshire had moved from Obama to toss-up, and Nevada has moved from McCain to toss-up. I suspect there's even more going on.

You mentioned the Quinnipiac polls. Those are going to begin to be seen in this rolling average of polls, so we're likely see even more of these states close up.

We have the largest number of toss-up states, 83 electoral votes, since we've had in April. And again, I think this is a result of -- you saw the national polls begin to show a tightening. And the state polls, which are not done as consistently or as often, are going to tend to reflect that, and we're starting to see that show up.

I wouldn't be surprised if next week we didn't see Obama drop below 270 and McCain actually begin to add some numbers to his total.

WALLACE: We've got less than two minutes left, and I want to go through the vice presidential issue with you.

First of all, timing. There were reports this week that McCain was going to name his vice presidential running mate this week to step on the Obama story. Obviously, that didn't turn out to be true. Now there are stories that he'll name him or her before the Olympics. If you were running the McCain campaign, just from a timing standpoint, when would you tell him he should name his running mate?

ROVE: I would wait until after Obama named his, because I'd want to keep that pizzazz and that -- even if that meant I had to do it during the week of the Republican Convention.

And interestingly enough, the key determinant here in announcing the vice president is going to be Obama's choice of a vacation date, in my opinion. He's not going to name his nominee before he takes the week off that we understand he told the Tory Party leader in Britain that he was going to take off.

So I think that we're going to have to wait until he has his vacation. I wouldn't be surprised to see him come back off of his vacation and name the nominee. I would suspect it's likely to be close to the beginning of the week of the 18th, either late the week before or during the week of the 18th.

But I think if I were McCain, I'd wait until after the Democrats chose theirs, even if it meant I waited until the week of the Republican convention.

WALLACE: And just real briefly, your sense -- give me two names that you think at this point are the leaders on the Republican side and on the Democratic side.

ROVE: Well, Mitt Romney on the Republican side. We had a buzz last week for Pawlenty. I don't know if this was deliberate on the part of the McCain campaign or just the accidental, you know, conversation that we have.

And on the Democratic side, you know, I don't know. I think you had one of the key possibilities on your show just a few moments ago. I think McCain -- or Obama is going to be looking at a red state Democrat -- Claire McCaskill coming from a Republican-oriented state where -- I was just there yesterday or day before yesterday, and they're feeling pretty good, the Republicans are, about keeping Missouri in their column.

But McCaskill might be a way for Obama to try and get at the heart of this battleground state.

WALLACE: Karl, thank you. It's always a pleasure. And we'll talk to you soon.

ROVE: Thanks, Chris. Great.

WALLACE: Coming up, our Sunday panel weighs in on the Obama trip and how effective John McCain was in stealing the spotlight. Back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: People of Berlin, people of the world, this is our moment. This is our time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCAIN: I'd much prefer to do it as president of the United States rather than as a candidate for the office of presidency.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: That was Barack Obama in Berlin and John McCain outside a German restaurant in Ohio this week.

And it's time now for our Sunday panel -- Brit Hume, Washington managing editor of Fox News, and Fox News contributors Mara Liasson of National Public Radio, Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard, and Nina Easton of Fortune Magazine.

Well, Brit, how did Obama do and did it change the dynamics of the race?

HUME: It doesn't seem to have so far. We won't know for a while. I must say I was struck by that particular speech in Berlin. It seems to me it was so celebrated, so publicized, broadcast live on all the cable channels.

You heard Claire McCaskill saying that that phase of the trip was a political trip. Now, what exactly was the reason for speaking to 200,000 people in Berlin? Can somebody explain to me what exactly that was doing, how that advances his campaign in any direct way?

I don't think it's there. And it was kind of an empty-calorie speech. And I think there's a -- there are a lot of people in America who love the idea of having a president who is the toast of Europe, because the current president for so long was not and has not been.

But I think there are a lot of people who kind of wonder about a president being the toast of Europe, globetrotting and then campaigning in Europe. He was campaigning in Europe. That's a peculiar thing to do. So perhaps the fact of the trip may overshadow its magnificent images to some extent. Although I think, on balance, obviously, he did very well. He's so charming and so polished. But I think it has a downside.

WALLACE: Mara, you know, we talked about the fact that there hasn't been a big bounce, but there has been in at least one poll. The latest Gallup tracking poll -- and let's put the numbers up -- shows that Obama is up by seven points, 48 percent to 41 percent over McCain. And this matches his biggest lead over McCain of the campaign since early June.

LIASSON: Yeah.

WALLACE: So you look at that, you look at the Quinnipiac state polls that I went over with Karl Rove, which are tightening, do you think there's a Europe bounce or not?

LIASSON: I think there's a little Europe bounce. Look, he accomplished what he set out there to do, which is to look presidential, to be on the same stage as these world leaders.

He certainly showed that he has tremendous support and can generate enthusiasm, which he can do in this country, too. But when he gave that big speech in Berlin, he didn't make a mistake.

And he burnished his commander-in-chief credentials or his foreign policy credentials by doing that. I do think he got a little bounce, not a very big one.

One thing about this race that has been really interesting is that despite the fact that he's running an almost flawless campaign, and you can't say that about McCain, and despite the fact that the Democrats have the wind at their back and the Republicans have the wind in their face, this race is really, really close.

WALLACE: And how do you explain that?

LIASSON: I guess I explain that because Obama still has not crossed the threshold that he needs to with voters, which is to prove to them that despite his inexperience and youth that he can be the commander in chief.

People still have doubts about him whether he's a safe enough choice, and McCain -- I guess it does speak to his strengths, despite all his other problems.

WALLACE: Bill, let's talk about some of the issues that came out this week -- Obama's continued unwillingness to acknowledge that the surge was a success, a growing consensus, you know, with the caveats about condition- based or not, about pulling troops out some time in 2010, and McCain accusing Obama of being willing to lose a war to win a campaign. Do you think any of those stick?

KRISTOL: First of all, Chris, I think this is our moment. This is our time. I love that you can just say that over and over again. WALLACE: Are you a citizen of the world, Bill?

KRISTOL: I am a citizen, proud citizen, of the United States and a citizen of the world.

I'm not so sure -- well, who knows whether Americans think that 200,000 Germans are likely to be right or not in their adulation for Obama?

I think the -- you know, the thing that struck me on the trip is that the surge matters a lot, and his refusal to admit at the beginning of the week that he was wrong -- I mean, he obviously was wrong. So why not say you're wrong and get it over with, so to speak?

I mean, it's -- to be wrong on a major judgment -- that happens, and I think people would say, "OK, look, a lot of people thought it wouldn't work." A lot of people who supported the surge were doubtful.

He thought the war had just been so mishandled we had to get out. Just say it. And now, as you say, he and McCain going forward aren't that different from one another, so you sort of take the issue off the table.

I think his stubbornness on insisting that he wasn't wrong about the surge allows McCain to flip that into a forward-looking question about his judgment and his sort of ability to be serious about the responsibilities of commander in chief.

So in that respect, I think the surge -- the conventional wisdom is that's backward-looking, that doesn't really matter. I think there are people in the McCain campaign who say, "Ooh, any discussion of Iraq is bad for us." People are still somewhat against the war. I think the surge ends up being a very big thing for McCain.

EASTON: I think you can keep talking about the surge, but I think the big effect of this trip this week, which I think was a net positive, was not only being photographed with world leaders, but also he changed the dynamic of the debate in that -- Barack Obama did, and he now is setting the terms of debate.

And so you see all week long John McCain nipping at his heels like a cranky old uncle, you know, "I feel like I'm being left out," and all this -- and complaining about the breathless coverage, and even these negative ads that he's put out. They just -- he's got to be careful.

He does -- John McCain does pretty well in favorability ratings, but there's a danger there that people will just start turning against him. In some ways, he needs to cede the fact that people like Barack Obama.

The other thing about the trip to keep in mind, as opposed to 2004, is there has been an uptick in the number of Americans who think we need a better standing in the world. I mean, that's just -- polls have shown it. So I think the -- it's a different world than it was in 2004, and you can't just judge it the same way we judged the John Kerry race.

HUME: And, Chris, the thing you pointed to about the troop withdrawal timetable -- Maliki did Obama an inestimable service by suggesting that his timetable sounded about right to him.

Now, Maliki has a long history of overestimating the efficacy of his own military, and some people will remember that. But a lot of people won't.

And it allows the Claire McCaskills of the world and other surrogates and Obama himself to go around saying, "Look, I'm only trying to do something that the Iraqis themselves say they want done," never mind the fact, of course, that General Petraeus disagrees, and to a lot of Americans that will make a lot of difference.

But I think that was -- that helped a lot, but it didn't completely erase this problem he has, as Bill points out, with the surge. I would say that there were two big issues here. One was withdrawal timetable, and the other was the success of the surge. And I'm not sure they cancel each other out, but they come close.

LIASSON: You know, two things happened. Maliki did give him an incredible gift by suggesting that he liked the timetable, too. So did the president by talking about time horizons.

I think the other thing that happened is the 16-month timetable is getting squishier and squishier to the point where I think it's almost inoperative. I mean, he said that he still is sticking to it.

On the other hand, he says there's going to be a residual force, and he can't say how big that's going to be. As a matter of fact, he told Newsweek that it's going to be entirely conditions-based.

WALLACE: And Claire McCaskill...

LIASSON: It sounds like a conditions-based withdrawal.

WALLACE: And Claire McCaskill here today, when I asked her how flexible is the 16 months, she said it's goals, not a deadline or timetable. It's goals.

LIASSON: Yes, goals, and he at many times has not described it as a goal but has said, "We will be out, you know, in 16 months." So I think that that's getting squishier and squishier.

At the time that he had to hew to it so firmly was when he was looking like a flip-flopper on a whole lot of issues, and I think he was getting some flak from his left-wing base.

HUME: Well, I...

KRISTOL: I disagree that...

LIASSON: But I think that's changed. I think he is -- that is now just something that's going to be adjusted daily.

KRISTOL: But I disagree with the conventional view that Maliki helped Obama a lot. The notion that we're all agreed that we're going to draw down now over the next administration's term in Iraq takes away what was McCain's biggest vulnerability -- we're going to be fighting there forever.

What was the single -- what did the Democrats love the most, what was the one sound bite of McCain they were going to put in all their ads? "We're going to have to -- we might have to stay in Iraq for 100 years." It was unfair to McCain, but they thought that was gold.

Now we're all agreed that we can move on and we can draw down, and now we can have a debate about judgment. Would we have won if Obama had been president? We won because McCain supported the surge. I think actually the Iraq story is now helping McCain a lot.

EASTON: But Obama can continue to say, "I'm looking forward, and my position is not out of step with commanders on the ground or the Iraqi government."

WALLACE: We have to take a break here. We'll agree to disagree.

But coming up, it's the most popular game in town, and we're getting closer to the finish line. Who are the frontrunners to grab the number two spots of the Obama and McCain presidential tickets? All you need to know, right after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WALLACE: On this day in 1953, the Korean War ended with an armistice. A demilitarized zone was created between North and South Korea to separate the two countries. The DMZ is still in place today.

Stay tuned for more from our panel and our Power Player of the Week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCAIN: One of the toughest decisions a president makes is setting priorities, and so that has to be those obviously important characteristics, and one of them, of course, is someone who can take your place immediately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: That was John McCain this week talking about what he's looking for in a vice presidential running mate.

And we're back now with Brit, Mara, Bill and Nina.

All right, let's play "veepstakes." First of all, the question of timing, Brit -- when should Obama and McCain announce their choices, before the Olympics, just before the convention? Should -- as Rove said, should McCain wait for Obama to go first?

HUME: Well, if you're thinking in terms of, you know, whether you'll get a couple of days of publicity out of it, and maybe suppress the other guy's story, I suppose you could make a case for announcing early.

The truth is it doesn't really matter. What matters is whether you make a sensible choice. And once you've decided that you've made a sensible choice, then the whole bloody thing stops mattering altogether, perhaps forever, at least certainly till election day.

WALLACE: But what are we going to talk about for the next month? It becomes very important.

HUME: Well, that's what you're going to talk about.

WALLACE: Well, I suspect you'll be talking about it on Monday.

HUME: I'd rather talk about something else, but -- because I don't really -- I think that Obama's choice needs to be someone who is seen as a potential president and who can perhaps fortify Obama's weak areas in terms of experience. And I think that's about all he needs to do with it.

There's the Hillary question and whether he'll have an upset convention on his hands if he doesn't name her, and that all remains to be seen, and that is at least one hope of news people for a story out of that convention, which is likely to be nothing but another love fest. So I guess he has to concern himself with that.

WALLACE: Your sense of the timing?

LIASSON: Conventions are supposed to be love fests if they're good.

I think the timing -- I agree with Brit. The timing is less important than the choice. I think the good timing for McCain would be to step on Obama's big stadium speech on Thursday night and have something to compete with the Obama post-convention bounce.

WALLACE: So you think he should announce it...

LIASSON: Late. Late.

WALLACE: ... right at the end of the Obama convention.

LIASSON: Late. And then the attention switches to the Republicans and St. Paul.

For Obama, I think that he could do it any time before the convention. I guess he doesn't want to do it on a big Olympic night. That would probably be a mistake. But I think he has a little more flexibility, and he's not worried about competing with the coverage for McCain.

I think that the more significant thing is kind of the basic choice for both men. Do you go for somebody safe that maybe brings you a state, that maybe shores up your weaknesses, or do you want to underscore your message?

I mean, for Obama, either you pick somebody who has foreign policy experience, maybe has been a governor, an Evan Bayh, or do you pick somebody who's new and different? You know, Tim Kaine is a possibility. For McCain, I think it's the kind of Romney versus Tim Pawlenty or Bobby Jindal.

WALLACE: Well, let's talk about the Democrats, Bill, because I think if you crystallize it, Mr. Kristol, it's a choice between experience, especially in foreign policy, and doubling down on change and a fresh face. Which way do you think he should go?

KRISTOL: Yeah. I'm told two things by people pretty close to the Obama campaign. On the experience question, Obama does not think he gets anything by having a vice president who's been on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for 20 years.

If people think Obama's up to being commander in chief, if he can make that case, as he tried to last week, he'll make the case. The debates are key to that.

If he's comfortable vis-a-vis McCain, looks knowledgeable, he'll make the case. If he doesn't make the case, people aren't going to say, "Well, I don't really think Obama's up to the job, but Joe Biden is the vice presidential nominee, so that will be OK."

So I think Obama does not believe that he needs an experienced foreign policy senator.

Secondly, I'm told Obama is inclined and the campaign is inclined to make the pick in the next week and a half. They'd like to do it before the Olympics. They'd like a vice presidential nominee to campaign throughout August.

Obama will take a little time off. Obama's done his huge European tour. Let a fresh face go out there and make the case.

And I think they're very inclined toward Tim Kaine, the governor of Virginia, who I think is an attractive pick and might bring Virginia, which would be very -- which is a big chunk of electoral votes for Obama.

So I'm thinking Obama will meet -- he's in Washington on Tuesday, two days from now. He'll have a secret meeting with Tim Kaine -- this is my theory -- they'll work it all out. And then on Monday, next Monday, August 4th, 11:00 a.m. in Richmond, Obama and Tim Kaine, and that will be an attractive young ticket. Kaine's a very popular governor of Virginia. He's a moderate. He's a Roman Catholic.

WALLACE: Could you be a little bit more specific in your...

KRISTOL: No, I'm telling you, August 4th, 11:00 a.m. I'm way out there on a limb here. Richmond, Virginia.

EASTON: While he might do that, I think that would probably be a wrong choice. And I'm not sure that that's the way the campaign's heading, because this is a campaign that wants to win and is very orchestrated in taking steps to win. We saw that in the primary campaign where they went after the caucus states.

Obama's big problem now is that he's considered a risky choice by something like 55 percent of the public. McCain kills him in polls on the national security and how to handle Iraq...

HUME: Commander in chief, yes.

EASTON: ... commander in chief credentials.

WALLACE: All right, so go ahead.

EASTON: So he needs somebody who's going to bolster that. And I'm not sure a governor -- going to a swing state governor is the way to go. I think somebody like a Jack Reed, a senator -- you know, Army Ranger...

WALLACE: Senator from Rhode Island.

EASTON: ... senator from Rhode island...

WALLACE: Former Army Ranger. EASTON: ... former Army Ranger, who, by the way, also voted for FISA, the wire -- voted against the FISA compromise, so the left would like that.

WALLACE: This is the electronic surveillance.

EASTON: The electronic surveillance thing that got the left mad at -- angry at Obama. But I think somebody like that is what he needs.

And I just don't see him -- I also don't see him going for a woman outside of Hillary. I think, A, it would upset Hillary supporters, but, B, you can't put a woman and -- who's not Hillary and, you know, a biracial candidate on a ticket and expect to win independent voters.

WALLACE: All right. Let's turn to the Republicans and McCain. And it seems to me it's a choice between safe and a surprise.

HUME: Right.

WALLACE: Which way do you think he'll go on that?

HUME: My guess is he'll pick safe. I mean, he's not far enough behind to throw the long ball, and so I think -- you know, obviously, I don't think he's going to pick somebody who's older than he is. There probably isn't anybody like that around who's -- you know, just because he's older. But you know, I think he's got a range of people he could choose. Tim Pawlenty, for example -- relatively conservative...

WALLACE: Governor of Minnesota.

HUME: ... governor of Minnesota. It puts Minnesota in play, perhaps. I mean, that's just one example. McCain has a fair number. I don't think he'll throw the long ball.

WALLACE: And what do you think about what seems to be the frontrunner at least in the conventional wisdom, Mitt Romney?

HUME: Mitt Romney. Well, he'd be an attractive choice, I think. He brings some experience. I guess he brings, you know, his knowledge of the business world, which is -- but I think that might even tend to underscore the fact that -- it might look like another way of McCain stating again he doesn't know much about the economy, which I don't think is something he necessarily...

WALLACE: He also brings family roots in Michigan, and that's obviously a key swing state.

HUME: Doesn't hurt. Doesn't hurt.

WALLACE: Mara, your thoughts about the McCain choice?

LIASSON: I think Romney makes a lot of sense. I mean, first of all, McCain is a very visceral politician. He makes his own decisions. We don't think he has a lot of love for Romney, but that might be changing. I think it makes a lot of sense. I mean, there is Michigan.

I think that Romney has a certain amount of support inside the party. You know, there is the Mormon thing and, you know, we saw in the Republican primaries that being a Mormon and being 72 were both negatives. Now you'll be combining them. But I think that's the safest, most standard pick.

WALLACE: Bill, now, you have been out on a limb, and you -- with Governor Palin of Alaska. And I assume you are sticking with that and you're going to tell us now the precise time of that news conference.

KRISTOL: I think she would be an exciting pick. I don't expect it. But you know, McCain is capable of doing something surprising.

I think the McCain campaign wants a safe pick, which I think is Romney or Pawlenty. McCain personally, I'm told, would love to pick Tom Ridge, the former governor of Pennsylvania, with whom he's personally close, and I don't think that's at all out of the question.

I think if he thought he could get Pennsylvania with Ridge, and also Ridge would be effective in Ohio and maybe Michigan, an industrial state, governor with working-class roots, I think he would like to pick Ridge. He loves Bobby Jindal, McCain does.

WALLACE: Well, I want to go back to Ridge for a second, though.

KRISTOL: OK.

WALLACE: He is pro-choice and as recently as a couple of weeks ago on this show said he believes what he believes. Won't that send the conservative base, which has problems with McCain, over the moon?

KRISTOL: Two things. Ridge would have to say that, of course, McCain's going to be president. He will set administration policy on these -- whatever key issues there are.

The president doesn't do that much, truthfully, on the abortion issue, but -- and of course, McCain's going to make the Supreme Court nominations, not the vice president. So I think Ridge would have to say that to reassure conservatives. But I think conservatives could be -- could accept Ridge if it was presented properly.

EASTON: Well, I think...

KRISTOL: And I'd just say I think from McCain's point of view, having a little -- showing a little independence of Republican orthodoxy wouldn't be so terrible.

I say this as a pro-life conservative, but you know, from a political point of view, having a little bit of a rebellion on the right at the Republican convention and showing that streak of independence for moderates -- it wouldn't be so bad.

If you're a Hillary Clinton supporter... WALLACE: Nina, you get the final 20 seconds. Republican choice?

EASTON: I was just going to say, I think that is what the McCain aides fear, is a rebellion at the convention if it's Tom Ridge, who is his good friend.

I think they're going to look at the swing states. I think Pawlenty is right up there. But they're going to look at this crescent of swing states in the north, you know, and pick from that and -- classic strategy.

WALLACE: Thank you, panel. See you next Sunday.

I'm glad that that cleared it all up for you. Up next, our Power Player of the Week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WALLACE: In a town with so many people on the career fast track, Washington doesn't have a lot of folks you'd call real characters. But as we first reported in May, there is our Power Player of the Week.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STEIN: I am a commentator, an actor, an economist, a lawyer, a teacher, and a speaker, and...

WALLACE: Ben Stein is a jack-of-all-trades and a master of most. In a world of specialization, he is a charming exception.

Why so many different career choices?

STEIN: I feel as if I'm going crazy if I'm just sitting at home doing nothing. And I like -- I just really love being in motion.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEIN: Bueller? Bueller?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Stein is best known as the stultifying economics teacher in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEIN: ... to alleviate the effects of the -- anyone? Anyone? The Great Depression.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STEIN: We only did one take, just did it all out of my head ad libbing. One take. The extras and the cast and crew applauded. I'd never seen that before on a set.

WALLACE: That success got Stein more jobs in movies and television, commercials...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEIN: Wow.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: ... and as a game show host. But in fact, Stein is a real economist.

Are we in a recession?

STEIN: No. I'll tell you unequivocally, we're not in a recession.

WALLACE: And he has a book out telling you how you can supercharge your stock portfolio.

What's your advice to investors right now?

STEIN: When times get tough, keep on buying. That's when you make money, is when other people are screaming bloody murder and saying things are terrible. That's when you make money.

WALLACE: And then there's Stein's new documentary, "Expelled," in which he lays out the case for intelligent design and tells of teachers and scientists who have been fired for straying from Darwin's theory of evolution.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(UNKNOWN): I was viewed as an intellectual terrorist.

STEIN: Terrorist.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Do you believe that evolution and intelligent design should be given equal weight in the science classroom?

STEIN: Well, I don't think that you should teach them on any kind of proportional basis that I can figure out, but I think that if a student or a teacher says Darwinism will take us so far and no farther, he should not be punished.

WALLACE: But perhaps as impressive as any of his careers is the sum total of his work.

Do you think that if you'd focused on one thing, you might have amounted to something?

STEIN: Oh, yeah. I think I would have amounted to probably a Grade 14 civil servant at the Federal Trade Commission.

WALLACE: And then he gave a perfect Ben Stein answer to explain all the choices he's made. STEIN: I have an insane love of dogs. I just love dogs. And I did not like having to go off to the office every day and leave my dog at home. I wanted a job where I could be with my dog all day. And that was Hollywood.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WALLACE: All these years later, Ben Stein has two dogs, both German short-haired pointers, named Bridget and Cleo.

And that's it for today. Have a great week, and we'll see you next "Fox News Sunday."