Eric's article suggests some thoughtful questions to ask Nelson at his confirmation hearing. Specifically, why he wants to be NASA administrator? That might be a bit of a rhetorical question. With regards to NASA, Nelson's got a record that has demonstrated self-serving, egotistical manipulation. Historically, he has not been supportive toward making decisions that would have created smarter U.S. Space policy. Nelson only came around to SpaceX when it meant FL jobs. He can't simply divorce himself from 40 years of playing Ballast Bill for the Space Coast. Bridenstine might have been a politician, but at least he wasn't compromised by catering to a major Space hub in Oklahoma.
Nelson's nomination looks safe. He'll probably get quick Congressional approval. At least it's good business for Eric. Gives him four more years of steady readership as he rips into the SLS boondoggle.
Do any of you have clear insight to Nelson's positions regarding Space X in particular, and more broadly the private sector initiatives?
Frankly I was not especially a Bridenstine fan nor much of a Nelson one. His Senatorial advocacy seemed to me to be always directed to the legacy industrial priorities. After all his largest political contributor was L3Harris. That might not bode well for rational NASA progress. Maybe I am too cynical.