Replies

What is your position if Specter could be the deciding vote on the nuclear option? The thought is that the nuclear option would be brought up as the first order of business. Then the chairmenships could be voted on. This way reneging is not a possibility.

One other important point that I left out. Consider what ousting Specter would do. That would turn a vote against us that might be otherwise available (at least sometimes).

His vote has almost never been WITH us. If he turns what few votes he would have had with us to instead be against us, then he wouldn't be true to himself nor the people who voted for him in Pennsylvania. That would be beautiful, as it would help destroy his legacy at home.

As for the nuclear option, it only requires a simple majority. Of course the vote on it can be filibustered, but there may be enough Democrats from conservative states to wring that away for that one time (we would have to rely upon six Democrats rather than five if Specter voted with us). It may cost us in other ways up front, but it can be done.

If Specter continues in his protests, he would apparently rather risk screwing over Pennsylvania in the budget process in exchange for his unpopular position.

An if that is the case, I'm again on board for that.

other important point ... Consider what ousting Specter would do. That would turn a vote against us that might be otherwise available (at least sometimes).

This is true - AND we sure don't need to push him into going Independent or worse...we need that extra vote in the senate.

Pres. Bush and Rove have managed to play a good hand at the poker table so far - maybe we'd be best to leave them decide - they hold the cards and know what their hand is...