How many Dems are our famous "base"....

And who are they?

I've been a Democrat my whole life but I somehow think I may not be included in this base.

Help me out here.

I don't hate corporations per se...I'm not totally opposed to Globalization or Nafta, nor do I hate the DLC and think Clinton sold us down the river.

and therefore the base -- at least that would be the most sensical way to reason it.

I think you rise an interesting point, though. Why is it that what's perceived as the base of the Democratic Party is completely different to what's been the mainstream of Democratic politicians? Why is it that this "base" feels perpetually abandoned? And I'm not just talking about presidents, but congresspeople as well. For example, I live in NY, one of the most liberal states -- and Schumer and Hillary definitely don't mirror many of the positions of NY liberals.

Granted, most of my social contacts are around NYC and most of my political experience revolves around NYC -- but both Hillary and Schumer voted for the Patriot Act and the IWR, to start with.

It was certainly a political soft shoe. I remember Hillary's nuanced response quite well. It was the expedient thing to do...and those things must sometimes be done. I'm not willing to toss someone out for those reasons, even though I would have loved to have had someone who wasn't a joke call them on this.

What else?

Who else am I going to vote for? A Republican?

I'm not saying they should be tossed out. You ask "what else?" -- a million other little issues, and more importantly yet, the silence, but let's not nitpick; the overarching issue is the discrepancy between the intensity of Hillary's and Schumer's opposition to the Bush administration in the Senate, and the intensity of the same on New York streets. It's night and day -- or, at least, night and twilight. Look at, for example, Barbara Boxer -- she would also be elected in NY in heart-beat if she were on the ticket.

At the same time, the Republicans are voting in wingnuts like Bunning or DeLay or Lott. Those guys well mirror their base; voters in Mississippi don't have to vote with pinched noses, and many voters in NY do.

Given the circumstances and the times, I'd say all Democrats, elected or not, had two enemies in the aftermath of 9/11....Al Queda and the Republican Party...all too willing to make hay and seize the day.

And that is just about where we are in this grand political scheme of things. We still have both enemies...and it is hard to get one's footing in this mire.

I guess that what we're all trying to figure out. But the force is not with us right now.

It wasn't with them either until Osama handed them the football.

Osama and Bush are in an undeniable symbiotic relationship, conspiratory or not.

When you're the party if inclusion, you don't have a real centralized base. Sure, there are some common issues, but we're a party of many positions. That's one of the things that makes things difficult - we have to appeal to a wide array of beliefs.

And that is one thing that I am finding very frustrating these last few days since the election.

How can we have a discussion about inclusion without drawing lines in the dirt or taking our marbles and bolting?

you're not in it.

Plus that New Mexico flag automatically raises both confusion and suspicion.

(I'm a NM native, so I know.)

Of the 55 million who voted this time? lol

I'd guess

Is that the real reason we lost?

they were Dean supporters.

moving on, defining the base, building the flame.