Replies

I think the Specter's and Chaffee's of the Senate are the most worried over this. Lott is their champion compromiser, and under Nickles or Frist, they are going to be ignored. I don't think they will leave the party, but they are going to lose a great deal of influence.

Not in a 50-49-1 Senate, or even the Senate as it's constituted today.

Moderate Republicans vote with Democrats ALL THE TIME.

Nickles won't compromise with them, you're right, which is why he will never be elected Majority Leader.

Frist will have to be more moderate than you think.

The idea that a Republican-controlled Senate is going to operate like a Republican-controlled House is a fairy tale. It never has, and it never will, no matter who the Leader is.

I mentioned this the other day, and no one responded to it, but the fact is that if the Senate is closely divided, then Bush is better off with the Democrats leading it. Anyone who thinks having the Senate in Republican hands is an advantage is wrong, unless we had a veto-proof majority.

Bush cant really win with a Republican Senate, because they will compromise in a direction AWAY from the President. If the Senate were held by Dems, then the compromise is TOWARDS the President’s position.

I think Karl Rove understands this, and couldn’t care less if we lose the Senate over Trent Lott. The only exception to this, is on Judicial appointments, but Bush should have made recess appointments anyway.