<<But are you predicting that Daschle won't ever be the new majority leader?>>
No, I'm saying that his choice will be disappointing the left (who are incredibly childish about disappointment) or losing his leverage to the conservative Democrats. If he can walk that line, his political skills will be far greater than I think they are (though I consider him quite skillful).
One important development I'd like to see in the Senate, and one that has it's best chance from here forward, is the elimination of the term "moderate". There are only three kinds of Senators: liberals, conservatives, and porkers. You may want to refer to the porkers as "opportunists" but I won't insult them that much today. Suffice it to say that their only objective in Washington is to continue to be there, and the pork they leverage into the appropriations bills every year is their tool. (The idea behind term limits is to get rid of the porkers, and thus they attack term limit movements with blood in their eyes, while seeming totally apathetic about what they consider irritating details like, say, what might be best for their country). The fight in the Senate will be over the votes of the porkers, who can be bought with pork (of course). Note, as proof, that Jefford's move had not the least idealistic motivation at all about it. His move was about pork. He locked in the pork with Daschle, and made the jump. If Daschle plays his role of majority leader properly, he will win more than he loses-because majority leaders can dispense the most pork. But if he does that, by next year the left will hate him almost as much as they hate Bush.
The Bush team knows all this, and will work it to their advantage. The remaining Senate Republicans also know, but it remains to be seen if they can play it well. |
