[PEN-L:33458] Re: Re: Re: Trap tripped Lott

["Michael Hoover" <hooverm@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>>>dscanlan@xxxxxxx writes:
>>>So what has happened for the conservative right >>>that Bush let him [Lott] fall?

>>Michael Pollak:
>>The main reason is that this sort of open racism >>alienates swing voters
>>and if Lott stayed, he'd be a button ready to push >>for the next to years.
>>And the Dems have no other button so you can be sure >>they'd push it.

>Carrol Cox:
>I think it a mistake to assume there must be "a reason" for everything.
>There is a huge element of contingency in human >affairs. In the present
>case, Dan's question implies that there is _a_ >conservative right with a
central committee which consults its ultimate >interests (and estimates
>those interests correctly) before instructing the >President as to what
>color tie he should wear on Fridays.
>Bush and his aides just happened to think that it >would be a good idea.
>Carrol

most immediate 'reason': karl rove, karl rove,
karl rove...current administration does more
polling than any in history and numbers looked
bad for lott...

longer-term 'rationale': some important cons/reps
don't think lott was particularly effective is
previous incarnation as majority leader...bush
people never really like him and did so even less
when he showed willingness to work with daschle
in last 2 years...

my favorite 'explanation': columnist for orblando
paper suggested - presumably with tongue-in-cheek
but im not so sure - that lott was dem plant...
michael hoover