General Discussion

Demsrule86

(71,542 posts)

20. A base that needs to be energized in order to elect Democrats instead of Republican traitors isn't

Tue Mar 29, 2022, 02:28 AM

Mar 2022

the base. The boots-on-ground Democrats vote Democratic in every election and never fuck around with third parties ever -not in 2000 and not in 2016...don't know Who you are talking about but not our Democratic 'base' who are always energized to vote for Democrats-knowing what the costs will be if Republicans win. No, the base does not need to get their own way in all things in order to vote for the good guys. I should know, I work every year to elect Democrats, vote in every election, and donate to Democrats-that makes me and those like me the base. I don't need to be 'energized'. And I tire of the same old threats. Hasn't this sort caused enough misery in this country with their constant need to be 'energized'? And don't tell me they are the Democratic base because I don't believe it. They are Greens, Stein voters, People's Party types, and Justice Democrats...not the base.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

82 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Garland apologists [View all] Boydog Mar 2022 OP

Until something unquestionably damning is found, support Garland, Biden, Hoyt Mar 2022 #1

Pshaw! slightlv Mar 2022 #2

I'll still trust Biden. Hoyt Mar 2022 #3

So will I - when he gets an Attorney General. dchill Mar 2022 #5

Thank you. Garland's inaction will be Biden's downfall. When the base isn't energized, elections dem4decades Mar 2022 #6

I worry with you slightlv Mar 2022 #15

We're die hard here. We vote all the time but there's others we need that dem4decades Mar 2022 #67

The Democratic base is COMMITTED to our principles and votes reliably. Hortensis Apr 2022 #82

A base that needs to be energized in order to elect Democrats instead of Republican traitors isn't Demsrule86 Mar 2022 #20

I take it slightlv Mar 2022 #26

+1 betsuni Mar 2022 #35

The base is made up of people who can energies themselves Kaleva Mar 2022 #27

+1 betsuni Mar 2022 #32

The "base" helped get trump elected when they weren't energized enough to vote in 2016 Hoyt Mar 2022 #40

The base does not fail to vote over one issue of many treestar Mar 2022 #45

+1000 smirkymonkey Mar 2022 #65

I admire your opinion but when you say "I trust...". Or Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2022 #14

I'll trust Biden more than a bunch of people typing in little white boxes, including me. Hoyt Mar 2022 #42

I agree. But IMHO, he already knows that for whatever Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2022 #60

Honestly, and I'll be bashed, but think a lot of poor polls is we're spending too much time going Hoyt Mar 2022 #61

So, you think he, his enablers, and co conspirators Bettie Mar 2022 #63

He's not getting a pass. And if investigation causes us to lose House, he wins. Hoyt Mar 2022 #64

I think you are right. If it's taking too long for us... Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2022 #78

That's fine, so do I with Biden BradAllison Mar 2022 #53

I think Bragg has done worse than Jack shit, if I'm up to date on his decision to shut down msfiddlestix Mar 2022 #72

That is such an accurate description "consolation prize" Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2022 #79

Trump could shoot someone on 5th avenue SpankMe Mar 2022 #12

Yippers. Thats what he said.. slightlv Mar 2022 #28

I laughed when he said that, looks like the joke is on me! Emile Mar 2022 #77

What do you attribute that to? I mean very good men Laura PourMeADrink Mar 2022 #13

No. The actual "guts" it's taking is in 1st clearing the rot from the DOJ, FBI Budi Mar 2022 #18

I remember how well they insulated reagan for Iran-Contra. Proving guilt was harder than L. Coyote Mar 2022 #17

Right... slightlv Mar 2022 #30

Biden and Garland I get, but hell no to Bragg. You are sullying the first Celerity Mar 2022 #23

Since you are apparently imminiently knowledgable about Bragg's Department, did he ever find Hoyt Mar 2022 #43

The main (ex) prosecutors from the case disagree, & they ARE eminently (imminently is the wrong word Celerity Mar 2022 #47

Pomerantz was relatively low level - new hire for trump investigation - not head of the DA's office. Hoyt Mar 2022 #49

sorry, not playing into your spin and non sequitur games Celerity Mar 2022 #51

He was like Mueller, guy with nothing to do looking for one last big payday before moving to Florida Hoyt Mar 2022 #52

LOL, ridiculous. Which is it? First you said (falsely) he was some low level nobody, NOW you are Celerity Mar 2022 #54

He's 70 years old Celerity. Christ, it's not like he's trying to advance his career. Hoyt Mar 2022 #55

Oh, now we have the ageist card played, with the added bonus of repeatedly questioning his motives Celerity Mar 2022 #56

You queston Bragg's integrity. Sigh Hoyt Mar 2022 #57

Ex-Prosecutor suspects DOJ isn't working with Congress because they are 'compromised' TheBlackAdder Mar 2022 #4

What are the chances Jeffery Clarke was the only Trumper at DOJ? dem4decades Mar 2022 #7

+1, uponit7771 Mar 2022 #16

Absolutely. Here's a good dive into the Trump/Barr corruption of that Dept. Budi Mar 2022 #19

+1 Kaleva Mar 2022 #25

Thanks. And btw, It took Tom Perez and Eric Holder several years to undo the damage W did to .... Budi Mar 2022 #29

As tired and panic-y some of us feel slightlv Mar 2022 #31

He was a lousy choice for the Supreme Court Colgate 64 Mar 2022 #8

Well Mitch would certainly agree with that!! Budi Mar 2022 #24

I'm convinced Mitch slightlv Mar 2022 #33

I'm more curious about who wants AG Garland removed. Budi Mar 2022 #9

I don't have any particular problem stopdiggin Mar 2022 #10

Since you view AG's conduct (or really, the lack of public information about his conduct) as neglect Fiendish Thingy Mar 2022 #11

K & R . See my post #19 above & the Read I linked to. Budi Mar 2022 #22

I have no idea what may or may not be going on at the DOJ, and I'm not even going to try to guess. ShazzieB Mar 2022 #21

What does "the Garland apologists" mean? betsuni Mar 2022 #34

I am gradually coming to the conclusion... kentuck Mar 2022 #36

PATIENCE Emile Mar 2022 #37

I'm still hoping maybe Garland will time it right to make maximum R damage for the midterms dsp3000 Mar 2022 #38

How about a little information from you about how you know enough to MineralMan Mar 2022 #39

There used to be loads of people defending Boydog Mar 2022 #44

"It almost seems..." You don't know any facts, just as I said. MineralMan Mar 2022 #48

People are growing increasingly more Boydog Mar 2022 #50

Garland is not "oblivious." He knows people are impatient. MineralMan Mar 2022 #58

Of course, we know what's going on. It's all over the news... lame54 Mar 2022 #81

The Garland Haters are no better informed than anyone else Trumpdumper Mar 2022 #41

You are calling out DUers treestar Mar 2022 #46

I'm not an apologist xmas74 Mar 2022 #59

I'm thinking some of you would totally be down to indict Trump... Scar Tissue Mar 2022 #62

I agree with that. However, not sure that's best way to introduce yourself here. Good luck. Hoyt Mar 2022 #66

This post is divisive and out of bounds. CrackityJones75 Mar 2022 #68

It seems the peoples patience has ran out! Emile Mar 2022 #69

I would agree until I saw J6 congressional leaders calling on the DOJ to do something. uponit7771 Mar 2022 #70

Yes. The Jan 6 committee Boydog Mar 2022 #71

So being a divisive instigator on this forum helps? CrackityJones75 Mar 2022 #73

Do you think the J6 congressional leaders are being divisive too? Emile Mar 2022 #74

Oh forget it CrackityJones75 Mar 2022 #75

You can call out concerned posters as being divisive, but ignore a simple question. Emile Mar 2022 #76

Cogent argument.................for pessimists Shellback Squid Mar 2022 #80