Quite possibly, but there is little benefit to simply giving up. And frankly, I think you're too blithe in assuming that the Republicans in the Senate are such a simple block.
What's going to happen? Bush will nominate a hardcore right-winger. That nomination will be filibustered into the ground. Then things get interesting, because the Senate majority has a choice: they drop the anti-filibuster nuke (which many of them don't want to do), or they fall back and begin to negotiate.
Frankly, I don't think that the money decision is so simple, nor do I think *they* think it's so simple. You keep saying that it's black and white, and that we're fucked, yet the polls keep shifting. And the Senators are paying a *lot* of attention to those polls. Their loyalty to a President whose ratings are in the toilet are not the same as they were a year ago when those ratings were stratospheric. Their calculations are all about what the voters will think in another year, and at this point riding on the President's coattails isn't looking like nearly such a good bet any more.
Nor are the election purse-strings nearly so simple. Bush has held that tightly for precisely one reason: he was soaring in the polls. But as soon as that weakens, the party's collective equations change. At that point, senior Senators start to have a *lot* of power. Hell, all sitting Senators hold huge power. Do you really believe that the Party is going to fail to support their incumbents? Rubbish. Just possibly, factions in the party *might* try to support a challenger in the primary against one or two junior Senators, to make an example. That's the most that's realistically going to happen. The Party's highest priority is holding power, and they're mostly not stupid enough to cut their own collective throat by feeding on their own.
Yes, there's a danger in opposing Bush: the religious right would punish apostates. But again, that's a calculation. Being a *moderate* Republican is going to play very well in much of the country in the next election; being viewed as an extremist is going to get dangerous. Say an ideologue does get into the Court. Say that a major abortion case comes before it quickly. (Which the right wing is itching to do.) Do you want to be painted as a Senator who voted against Roe v. Wade? I'd bet that most of them are completely dreading that prospect. Satisfying the religious right this time is a fine way to win the battle but lose the war electorally, and a good bunch of Senators have to be thinking about that carefully.
Will Bush win? Quite possibly: he holds a strong hand. *If* he plays this smart, and nominates a cipher in the second round, he probably will win. But his track record of "smart" has been weakening lately, and it takes relatively few defections to weaken his position. And the moderates have a lot of incentive to defect. I'm actually quite curious to see how this plays out. And it's worth adding to the relatively small pile of mail that is actually centrist, saying essentially, "Don't be stupid"...
no subject
What's going to happen? Bush will nominate a hardcore right-winger. That nomination will be filibustered into the ground. Then things get interesting, because the Senate majority has a choice: they drop the anti-filibuster nuke (which many of them don't want to do), or they fall back and begin to negotiate.
Frankly, I don't think that the money decision is so simple, nor do I think *they* think it's so simple. You keep saying that it's black and white, and that we're fucked, yet the polls keep shifting. And the Senators are paying a *lot* of attention to those polls. Their loyalty to a President whose ratings are in the toilet are not the same as they were a year ago when those ratings were stratospheric. Their calculations are all about what the voters will think in another year, and at this point riding on the President's coattails isn't looking like nearly such a good bet any more.
Nor are the election purse-strings nearly so simple. Bush has held that tightly for precisely one reason: he was soaring in the polls. But as soon as that weakens, the party's collective equations change. At that point, senior Senators start to have a *lot* of power. Hell, all sitting Senators hold huge power. Do you really believe that the Party is going to fail to support their incumbents? Rubbish. Just possibly, factions in the party *might* try to support a challenger in the primary against one or two junior Senators, to make an example. That's the most that's realistically going to happen. The Party's highest priority is holding power, and they're mostly not stupid enough to cut their own collective throat by feeding on their own.
Yes, there's a danger in opposing Bush: the religious right would punish apostates. But again, that's a calculation. Being a *moderate* Republican is going to play very well in much of the country in the next election; being viewed as an extremist is going to get dangerous. Say an ideologue does get into the Court. Say that a major abortion case comes before it quickly. (Which the right wing is itching to do.) Do you want to be painted as a Senator who voted against Roe v. Wade? I'd bet that most of them are completely dreading that prospect. Satisfying the religious right this time is a fine way to win the battle but lose the war electorally, and a good bunch of Senators have to be thinking about that carefully.
Will Bush win? Quite possibly: he holds a strong hand. *If* he plays this smart, and nominates a cipher in the second round, he probably will win. But his track record of "smart" has been weakening lately, and it takes relatively few defections to weaken his position. And the moderates have a lot of incentive to defect. I'm actually quite curious to see how this plays out. And it's worth adding to the relatively small pile of mail that is actually centrist, saying essentially, "Don't be stupid"...