It's all about "the fight", isn't it?
No, it's not about the fight. It's about the vote.
But you look at the fight as a means to that. Then you have to weigh the downside. I don't see a downside to fighting, even if you lose.
Another - partially related - thought occurred to me, and I don't think I have seen anyone else post on this.
But you know when the ball was dropped?
It was dropped when they put Roberts up for the Chief seat instead of leaving him in the O'Connor seat. Think about it. If they had stayed the course, then a) they would have shown that they won't buckle to quota thought and declare that O'Connor's seat is permanently pink, b) if it is true that Roberts is going to be another Rehnquist, then the court would have moved right with Roberts replacing O'Connor. And c) if it turns out that Roberts is only a mod., then, well, in a sense, nothing is lost, though conservaives would be disappointed.
In retrospect (obviously and knowing the truths about hindsight), the Roberts hearings were pretty easy. If we can assume that he would have sailed through for O'Connor's seat, then the PRez could have nominated one of the conservative giants with a little more credibility for the Rehnquist seat. After all, it's just replacing another conservative with a conservative. That case would be pretty easy to make.
Sometimes first instincts are correct. Rather than take the easy way out and just promote Roberts, they should have stayed the course.
Just a thought.