Poll on Miers:

Contrary to the poll cited yesterday, this poll (it is my understanding that this is a Gallup Poll) finds much weaker support for Miers than Roberts, both among self-described conservatives and self-described moderates. Liberals generally dislike both, but if anything they slightly prefer Miers. Significantly fewer respondents express an initial positive impression of Miers than Roberts. Moreover, her status as a woman generally does not make respondents more likely to support her (most respondents say it makes no difference). By contrast, respondents indicate that they are less likely to support her in light of her being a close friend of the President, her "stealth" views on issues, and her lack of prior judicial experience.


Jason Sorens in the Comments points me to a Rasumussen poll that shows support for Miers falling. According to that poll, only 48% of Republicans say she should be confirmed and only 20% of Democrats.

TomFromMD (mail):
My first response upon hearing Meirs name was "who?" My second was "what makes her qualified?" My third was "Boy, Bush has really jumped the shark this time."

Incidentally, I'm glad to see the Conspiracy starting to allow comments as the rule rather than the exception. One of the criticisms from the liberal blogosphere has been that conservative blogs don't allow comments, and that this was indicitive of close-mindedness. For such a high visibility blog to allow comments is a step forward.
10.22.2005 12:23pm
Jason Sorens (www):
Hi Todd - your polls are a bit outdated. The latest Rasmussen poll shows support for Miers slipping badly. For the first time, more oppose than support her confirmation.
10.22.2005 2:12pm
Dave Hardy (mail) (www):
I'd like to see a real poll run, one that asks questions such as:

1. Have you heard the name "Harriett Miers"?

2. [If yes] Is she

a. Star of a popular sitcom?
b. Silver medal in swimming during the last Olypmics?
c. A country western singer?
d. real name of author George Sand?
e. A Supreme Court nominee?
10.22.2005 4:30pm
TomFromMD (mail):
The Rassmussen headline is odd.

"64% Say Miers Confirmation Likely"

This breaks down to

Very Likely 28%
Somewhat Likely 36%
Not Very Likely 19%
Not at All Likely 2%

Should "somewhat likely" fall under "likely"? I don't think so. I think she has about a 40% chance of being confirmed. I'd say that's somewhat likely. But if you ask me if it's likely to be confirmed, I'd consider that to be better than 50-50. So no, it's not likely.
10.22.2005 5:37pm
George Turner (mail) (www):

Don't forget about Senate gamesmanship. If the word in democrat circles is that Bush screwed up badly, and Miers is dividing the Republicans, and that she can't be counted on to rule with the conservatives on the court, do you

A) confirm her - noting that she'll be a weak voice for the conservatives, and noting that she's 60 and won't be on the court as long, and to take advantage of Bush's mistake.

B) reject her, knowing that the next nominee will more likely represent a "true" conservative - possibly requiring a filibuster and the nuclear option right before an election year.

By this logic, the Democrats would be more likely to confirm Miers than with Roberts, who was very young, extremely conservative, and up for the Chief Justice slot.

If true, they'll only need to pick up a handful Republicans to get her on the court.
10.22.2005 6:44pm
Been There, Done That:
the democrats are more interested in one thing than all others, more than roe v. wade, more than judicial activism or their notions of civil rights, more than any cause.

It is the same cause most valued by republicans.


So they are better off sinking miers, embarrasing bush, then fighting, win or lose, on ideological grounds that excite their base and get their people stirred up.

If they support a weak bush nominee, it depresses their base.
10.22.2005 11:22pm
James of England:
Re: Democrats; It looks like Reid promised support in an Orrin Hatch kind of bargain. If he did that, he should probably vote to confirm her. I'd guess that a few other Dems following him would be possible, and that'd mean that you needed a fair few republicans to go against her for her to lose on an up/down vote. I can't believe that the republicans would fillibuster her.

Re: qualifications. Surely she's not much less qualified than Thomas, and Bush promised to put up people like Thomas. Or did Thomas become a much better judge in his year on the DC circuit?

If you don't like Thomas, you should have complained when Bush said he'd appoint someone like him.
10.23.2005 2:05am
CharleyCarp (mail):
OT, but I thought this was worth a minute to read.
10.23.2005 11:06am