(Republicans got nothing from this deal that they couldn't have gotten by cutting off the filibuster. This was no horse trade -- it was a give away.)
If Frist was sure to win the vote, do you think this compromise would have happened? Basically the Dems were very nervous about losing the fight outright and the rules be changed. Since they were scared they gave up a few judges in the hopes that something changes electorally and they get some help. The Republicans get a bunch of judges and they still have the option to change the rules. Strategically though the Democrats are the ones who dictate when the fight happens as they can wait to filibuster someone they think they can paint as an extremist. The Republicans understand that and will be may be nervous about nominating a really strong conservative.
I don't agree. I think when Rheinquist retires, Scalia becomes Chief Justice, and there is no way that they will put up a moderate. Why should they? Who has the majority anyway?
As far as I can see from the breaking news Frist wasn't even in the room. This whole thing was held in McCain's office. So, we don;t really know what the vote may have been.
Basically the Dems were very nervous about losing the fight outright and the rules be changed.
If they were so nervous about losing the fight why would the Republicans make a deal? You don't deal away something you may win.
Strategically though the Democrats are the ones who dictate when the fight happens
This is true. We've given the Democrats the ball and we're playing in their court now. One Democrat can say the magic words: "Extreme Circumstances", and we're back to square one.
The Republicans understand that and will be may be nervous about nominating a really strong conservative.
So, what you're saying is that the Dems win by default? Republicans are so afraid of a fight that they give the Dems the kind of activist judges they want? How long will Conservatives back a Party that does that?