Place your bets - Miers does or does not get confirmed?

Not Confirmed. Bound up in hearings without a vote, with the Republicans having too little support to force the nuclear option. She'll be withdrawn after the Dems grandstand, and an even more conservative nominee offered that would unify Republican support and eventually have to be pushed through with the nuclear option.

It wouldn't surprise me if that isn't what has been planned all along. As a personal friend of Bush, she could be trusted to withdraw gracefully, making way for someone even further right that Roberts.

Just my nutty theory.

Wow Baker. Definitely a wild theory. I just don't see the Democrats really stopping the nomination. At least not as things currently stand. Most of them seem content to watch the conservatives eating their young (so to say). I'm not saying that the Dems are going to rush into voting yes on Miers, but I'll give them credit for (thus far) being smart enough to let the conservatives be the ones that are brusing up Miers.

When the hearings actually start though, the Dems can jump in guns a blazin' and start exercising the NO! votes. Until then, they really don't have to press that hard. They're getting what they want now, without burning off any political capital.

Many Republicans are already saying that they don't support the nomination either. With your count, either you assume they are lying, or that an equal number of Dems will vote FOR Meirs. First, she has to get voted on at all, and I don't think she'll get any easier time from Republicans than she will from Democrats.

There is no united front on the Right at this point. The reason Bush has dropped in the polls is not because Dems are dissatisfied, but because he continues to betray conservatives. This nomination is seen as such, and frankly I am pretty sure it is going to be handed back to him.

So, either he was being stupid, or he posed someone who would offend Republicans knowing he'd give them what they want when she was rejected. If I'm wrong I'll admit it later, but I don't see her getting the seat. Frankly, I don't think she deserves it. I expect the second nominee to be one WORTHY of the nuclear option.

Confirmed. I do admit though, if he pulls this one off, Bush'll be able to walk on water in Washington, having proved himself untouchable. Could miss I guess, even Roosevelt had trouble with Supreme Court nominations (of course he was packing the court rather badly) and he was one of the most popular presidents ever.

Confirmed.

How close do you think the vote will be?

I have my own theory, and already wrote it in an article, placed for my viewing only.  Once Miers is played out one way or another, I will unhide it so people can see how stupid or insightful I am.

Still looking for more prognostication here. Don't be shy, give us your insight early

not confirmed, the right-wing kooks in the party want a very conservative nominee and I believe a showdown with the demon-craps.

"the right-wing kooks in the party want a very conservative nominee and I believe a showdown with the demon-craps."

As much as I hate to have to, I agree. There are hypocrites already saying they want to know her opinions on abortion...on the REPUBLICAN side. How they could after what was said about Roberts is beyond me. Just goes to show that there is really only one brand of politician with different labels.

Not confirmed. My guess is that she never comes out of committee. They'll stonewall it there (or make her look so ridiculus during hearings) and the nomination will be withdrawn.

Then, when Bush gets around to nominating his REAL nominee ... It'll be an interesting fight.

Not Confirmed. Bound up in hearings without a vote, with the Republicans having too little support to force the nuclear option. She'll be withdrawn after the Dems grandstand, and an even more conservative nominee offered that would unify Republican support and eventually have to be pushed through with the nuclear option. It wouldn't surprise me if that isn't what has been planned all along. As a personal friend of Bush, she could be trusted to withdraw gracefully, making way for someone even further right that Roberts. Just my nutty theory.

Very interesting theory, Baker... hadn't thought of that before. Hmmmmmmm... worthy of consideration.

I have my own theory, and already wrote it in an article, placed for my viewing only. Once Miers is played out one way or another, I will unhide it so people can see how stupid or insightful I am.

Well that's just no fair! I wanna see! I wanna see!!!

E-mail it to me... I won't tell anyone, I swear!

I think she'll be confirmed. But what do I know? LOL

#9 by BakerStreet Monday, October 17, 2005

"the right-wing kooks in the party want a very conservative nominee and I believe a showdown with the demon-craps." As much as I hate to have to, I agree. There are hypocrites already saying they want to know her opinions on abortion...on the REPUBLICAN side. How they could after what was said about Roberts is beyond me. Just goes to show that there is really only one brand of politician with different labels. Bonus Rating: Trolling Insightful

yep one kinda politician selfish self serving mother f##kers.

Secretly, Miers will have an easy time of it.

You bet on the same number of Dem.'s that voted against Roberts voting against Miers versus the same majority of Republicans with some added support from those who may not have voted for Roberts and Miers is in.

This administration (with it's in-tow Senate) does it's best magic when expectations are low.

After Miers gets the seat, there will be natural reunification in the G.O.P. as long as there are any members left after indictments are finished being handed out.

(just kidding about that last part, guys)

Miers Supported Ban on Most Abortions...

She's shown her hand on these issues, and has little or no experience with constitutional law. She has activist groups working 24/7 against her, and people in both parties who take offense at her even being nominated.

This is no Roberts, and I don't think she'll have an easy time.

Since the left cares so much about murdering unborn children this latest smear should galvinize the left to block her nomination.


odds now set by mm 3 to 2 against.

This is no Roberts, and I don't think she'll have an easy time.

You're right, she's no Roberts, and yet, you see very little outcry from Dems nitpicking her nonexistent paper trail from the bench.

Maybe she'll be grilled, or not, but the fact is, most 'conservative' delegates will vote for her for the single reason that she's a Bush pick - despite whatever 'outcry' is being displayed now.

"You're right, she's no Roberts, and yet, you see very little outcry from Dems nitpicking her nonexistent paper trail from the bench. "

You mean besides the majority that are already nitpicking? Hell, I saw a pro-life, REPUBLICAN Senator comment on the questionaire mentioned above, saying "It gives me some comfort" but he still wouldn't say for sure whether he'd vote for her. She simply doesn't have big league experience.

Have you seen any talk show pundits in favor of her? If I have seen any at all, I don't recall it, and I watch conservative news quite a bit. This is a Borking waiting to happen, imho.

The fact is, most Washington Republicans want someone they can say is a staunch conservative in there. They have the votes to force the President to nominate someone like that, and enough to crush Democrat opposition. I think they feel betrayed by this choice, and won't support it just to tow the President's line..

I'll say this, though. Dems might end up supporting her simply because they know the next nominee will be chosen specifically to please the Republican majority, not just Texas favoritism.

They most certainly don't want that kind of nominee. They might actually accept those ills they have, than fly to those they know not of, to abuse the bard...

You mean besides the majority that are already nitpicking? Hell, I saw a pro-life, REPUBLICAN Senator comment on the questionaire mentioned above, saying "It gives me some comfort" but he still wouldn't say for sure whether he'd vote for her. She simply doesn't have big league experience.

..and had I been paying enough attention to current events to be informed enough to know exactly which senator you're speaking of I would be able to confidently reply, "That senator is still going to vote for Miers", but since I'm not so inclined, I'll STILL say,

"That senator is STILL going to vote for Miers."

As I said, one can still count on support from 'conservative' senators, regardless of their display..



"We'll create the firestorm so they don't have to, then we'll do what we want."

Did I mention I love politics?

If you end up being right, I'll come back and tip my hat to you. The fact is, though, politics isn't just Democrat and Republican, and a lame duck President isn't going to be worth investing obedience in for much longer. If the Conservative congressmen decide they want someone more conservative, they can force the issue.

I think you overestimate the love they have for Bush, frankly. He's caused them tons of problems, and thrown them few bones. I wonder why you think they will bow down to his texas bushhogging buddy. Just because they are one big happy party?.

"The comments I have heard range from incomplete to insulting," Leahy said.

Lots of nitpicking in that article.

The fact is, though, politics isn't just Democrat and Republican

I agree, I like (or dislike) to think of our representatives as 'Republicrats'.

I wonder why you think they will bow down to his texas bushhogging buddy. Just because they are one big happy party?

I think it is because they understand:

A. The 'Christian Right', so to speak, will be very happy to finally see something done on their behalf.

B. If this pick isn't taken it could lead to no pick being confirmed before the next presidential election (stonewalling dems, dissension in the ranks, other business, etc.) or...

C. Bush picks a worse candidate or, at least, a highly contentious one that leads back to reason 'B'.

This is a Borking waiting to happen, imho.

I needed to answer this as it ties in to what I'm attempting to express...

There is no 'on bench' experience, so that takes away detractors' ability to hack away there, but at the same token, she does have oodles of law experience proving she's versed in some understanding of the law so it's hard for people to completely claim she's without credentials.

This leaves critics of Meirs with two other weapons; one, her being a strong Christian and two, that she is a strong admirer / ally of the President.

In regards to the former, people whacking away at her denominational choice may possibly be branded / outed as 'anti-christian' and risk political injury to themselves, with the latter, I believe only left-of-center Democrats will even attempt to use that reason as means to sink Meirs and will probably only get a few blurbs in the MSM for a day or two, tops, before being replaced by some other blurb.

I think you overestimate how trustworthy she appears to the religious right. There are people they would most certainly want more, and people on that list would breeze past the Republican majority. This isn't pandering to the Right, or pro-lifers, this is simply handing a job to a friend, and no one likes that, frankly.

MM resetting odds at, 3.5 to 2 against confirmation.