I just don't see it
Bunnie and everybody (but me) who has commented on her post think the Republicans sold out on the compromise which is going to get three of the President's judicial nominees voted on, and shift the issue from the horrible Republicans who are trying to obstruct the Democrats' freedom of speech to the actual (and considerable) merits of the remaining nominees.
A quick glance through the various Blogs for Bush (see the second blogroll on the right margin of this page) reveals that Republican bloggers seem virtually universal in their agreement with Bunnie's take.
Sorry, but I just don't see how the remaining nominees are less likely to be confirmed because of the deal than they were before. Nor do I see how giving up the "nuclear option-" an albatross around the GOP's neck which according to all the polls had taken the onus off the Democrats for their obstructionism and put it on the Republicans- hurts them one bit.
If the Republican majority had actually abolished the filibuster, or even changed the cloture rule to require only a simple majority, that would have been the issue in next year's congressional elections. The Republicans would likely have lost the Senate, and certainly would have thrown away the possibility of gaining seats. As it is, the Democrats' obstructionism, rather than the Republicans' allegedly heavy-handed tactics, will be the issue. And as I noted, the remaining nominees are no less likely to be confirmed than they were before, while three are now certain to be.
How do the Republicans not win? How do the Democrats not lose?
A quick glance through the various Blogs for Bush (see the second blogroll on the right margin of this page) reveals that Republican bloggers seem virtually universal in their agreement with Bunnie's take.
Sorry, but I just don't see how the remaining nominees are less likely to be confirmed because of the deal than they were before. Nor do I see how giving up the "nuclear option-" an albatross around the GOP's neck which according to all the polls had taken the onus off the Democrats for their obstructionism and put it on the Republicans- hurts them one bit.
If the Republican majority had actually abolished the filibuster, or even changed the cloture rule to require only a simple majority, that would have been the issue in next year's congressional elections. The Republicans would likely have lost the Senate, and certainly would have thrown away the possibility of gaining seats. As it is, the Democrats' obstructionism, rather than the Republicans' allegedly heavy-handed tactics, will be the issue. And as I noted, the remaining nominees are no less likely to be confirmed than they were before, while three are now certain to be.
How do the Republicans not win? How do the Democrats not lose?
Comments