What if... Harriet Miers isn't supposed to be confirmed? As the days wear on, the dems, who originally seemed pleased with this nominee, are slowly backing off as news of her evangelical background comes into focus. They will not vote to confirm her based on her Christian beliefs, but they'll cite her lack of experience and a "paper trail."
This will be a lie, of course, the real reason won't be her presumed lack of experience, it'll be the Jesus thing and they'll swear up one side of the Constitution and down the other that it's not her ideology.
This is where they'll fall into the trap. The usual RINOs will side with the dems on her confirmation or lack thereof. The President will then withdraw her nomination, citing a new era of cooperation. "Advise and consent" has worked again just as it did with John Roberts. Since now the dems will be on record saying it isn't about ideology, it's about qualifications, citing Justice Roberts again, the road will be paved for the nomination of Priscilla Owen or Janice Rogers Brown.
Since the dems weren't opposed to either of them recently, i.e. the "gang of 14 deal", and the dems clamor for a highly qualified candidate, they won't have any ground to stand on while trying to oppose either Brown or Owen.
Perhaps it's rose colored glasses or a wild pipe dream, but I can't believe that the President, who has been shrewd in nearly all of his appointments until now would not have a more... sinister plot behind this nomination than just putting Aunt Bea out there to go on the Supreme Court.
This would also be the perfect scenario to use the "nuclear option" if a fight would arise. Not only would the President have just loaded the Senate's weapon, he'd have aimed it and done everything but pull the trigger for them.
...or I could be on crack.
It's the Crack.