So with a Republican Senate, it's at least plausible that Nixon wriggles out, maybe by the skin of his teeth . . .
Yes, I think a Democratic House and a Republican Senate is among the more interesting Watergate possibilities.
And really, I don't consider cheating on an election to be that huge a deal.
Things like bombing Cambodia (and contributing to power vacuum) and supporting a 1973 coup in Chile, including agreeing with ITT and corporate interests in favor of the coup, for me personally rank much higher. Many of my fellow citizens give the president a pass on foreign policy, they admire 'toughness' even if the whole thing is misguided, and they rather assume . . well, if the president did it, it must have been a good idea.
The second Watergate special prosecutor Leon Jaworski wrote in his book
The Right and the Power that Nixon cheating on his income taxes, that registered high on the emotional richter scale with the American public. In fact, this was the occasion in which Nixon said, The American public has got to know whether their president is a crook or not; I am not a crook. But this was not included with the articles of impeachment.
The really huge charge would have been if it came out that Nixon took steps to sabotage the 1968 peace talks. This I consider to be tectonic shift. (the one saving grace might be that South Vietnam's Thieu not crazy about the talks since they would most likely require him to step down. so they might have failed anyway)