Winning by withdrawing.

Alito's nomination was made possible by the decision of Harriet Miers, in consultation with the White House, to withdraw her own. It was the right decision: It appeared highly unlikely that Miers would garner enough votes for confirmation, and there was no point in dragging out a defeat.

The withdrawal proved that the president, contrary to the attestations of some of his friends, is capable of recognizing and correcting his mistakes. It also showed that Miers's much-advertised willingness to put her own desires behind the needs of the president is real. That she immediately began work on a successor nominee is to her great credit.

But it must be said that the White House showed an astonishing incomprehension of conservatives until that moment. The weekend before her nomination was announced, White House aides told prominent conservatives that they would be "very happy" when the announcement was made--foolishly raising expectations that the nominee would be a known conservative all-star. The White House was taken aback by the conservative criticism. It then assumed that the criticism would blow over within a day. It thought that labeling the critics sexist and playing up the nominee's evangelical faith would dampen the criticism. And it treated the criticism as an elite phenomenon with no resonance outside the Beltway or inside the Senate. These assumptions proved wrong and counterproductive. Republican voters showed much weaker support for Miers than they had for John Roberts, and key Republican senators proved unwilling to support her.

The White House spent October telling pro-lifers that Miers was one of them and telling pro-choicers that her pro-life views would have no impact on her decisions. Meanwhile, her meetings with senators went very badly, and the White House was slow to draw the appropriate conclusions. Bush's political operation needs a tune-up.

Liberals, and some sulky Miers supporters, are now saying that conservatives, as a result of their campaign against Miers, have lost any standing to complain about the "Borking" of nominees, the imposition of ideological litmus tests, and the refusal to give nominees up-or-down votes. Their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.

Harsh words, including excessively harsh words, were sometimes said about Miers. But her own words were not distorted, and nobody said that "Harriet Miers's America" would feature a return to segregation. People who throw around the word "Borking" should review the actual record of 1987. The conservative critics of Miers did not demand that she proclaim herself to be pro-life; it was her defenders who emphasized (without proving) that point. And conservatives have complained about the filibustering of judges because they raise the bar for confirmation from 50 votes to 60. They deny confirmation to nominees who have majority support. Miers was withdrawn because she did not have majority support.

Liberals are not moved to make these weak arguments out of any lingering sense that Miers was a victim of injustice; they make them in order to hurt conservative nominees such as Alito. The conservatives who abet them have less rational motives. Many of them spent October explaining that conservatives skeptical of Miers's nomination should accept the fait accompli, be good party men, and move on. Her withdrawal is more of a fait accompli than her nomination ever was, and their continued anger about it undermines worthy Republican objectives more than the campaign against her nomination did. Their own principles should militate against their resentments. And all conservatives, whatever view they took of Miers--and there were conservatives of good standing on both sides--should unite behind Samuel Alito Jr.