My point is I get what you're point is but objectively speaking I think you are simply using the wrong strategy to get your point across. In terms of game theory, the corporate dem strategy is simply not Pareto optimal.
For me it's as simple as this. In the last 30 years the one election where the Democrats pushed a progressive populist message (Obama in '08) had the best turnout percentage wise since 1968. The strongest strategy is what Obama did in 2008 (progressive message to drive turnout from the bottom up of the base) not what Hilary did in 2016, not what Kerry did 2004, not what Clinton did in 1992.
1988 181,956,000 91,587,000 50.3%
1992 189,493,000 104,600,000 55.2%
1996 196,789,000 96,390,000 49.0%
2000 209,787,000 105,594,000 50.3%
2004 219,553,000 122,349,000 55.7%
2008 229,945,000 131,407,000
58.2%
2012 235,248,000 129,235,000 54.9%
2016 250,056,000 (estimated)
[10] 138,847,000 (estimated)
[10] 55.5% (estimated)
[10]