how many of our base are we going lose because of it?

I say we go after huge number of non-voters and put a big, concerted and on-going effort, with funding, investigative, legal and volunteer help in combating repug cheating.

Our GOTV effort should be on-going and aggressive as always but if we don't stop the repugs from cheating to stop our supporters from voting we get nowhere, maybe even lose ground.

IMO the minuscule number of deplorables we may get is not worth it.

It's GOTV and stop repug cheating.

Getting people to vote will be much easier than trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. I think out reach on college campuses is critical. All those young, energetic people who may not understand why they need to get involved in the political process. If we don't get them involved someone else will.

So, fuck them.

their kids to death. They ban together effectively to win elections, by cheating. Their money is all they think they need to be upper class. The rest of us are lower class, not slaves, more like free to be their lackies and worker bees.
They see us as being a step down on the species.

We see them as a step down too, for different reasons. Lack of a soul, lack of humanity, lack of empathy, often lack of intelligence, boorish, racists, deplorables.

Amazing we coexist as well as we do. I'm not sure it will hold.

We are in a non violent civil war, w a few assaults excepted. Does anyone think we could be in an all out civil war in 5 years. Evidently, according to stats, people are buying arms again,target groups like LGNTQ, blacks....and practicing, just in case.
I'm not. Could civil war break out...if they really did try to lock Hillary up, doubtful once Chaffetz leaves
If we want to lock up flynn and Kushner? It's getting worse faster than expected. The Western World sees us somewhere between a laughing stock and a borderline dictatorship.
Could we have a civil war?

to not engage in the fight that exists.

We are where we are at because of decades, well over a quarter century, of hate framing of the evil liberal boogyman, and frankly from democrats scurrying into a corner and hiding from that fight.

We can't win by "outreach" and to highlight that point, name the last time the onus of "reaching out" was put on the republican party/conservatives?

1) Democrats need to get past their "herding cats" tendendencies and develop a SIMPLE unified message.

2) We need to go at republicans directly and with the same passion and righteousness that they have gone at us for well over a quarter century now. They have so horribly damaged the public's idea of "liberal" over 95% bullshit, while our party leaders have meekly let them run amuck. The American people need to hear our party leaders screaming as loud and repeatedly as their about the REALITY for what they are.

There are hundreds in congress, thousands at the state level who are like this jackass who just got elected, of republicans who are completely off the hilt, partisan lunatics. There is one Democrat for every 10 in congress with similar fire.

"We" need to find a way to have some discipline and solidarity at the same time our leaders need to grow some balls and engage in the fight that exists out there.

You can't win by outreach but neither can you win by preaching to the choir.

We must challenge them every time. Not because it will convince them but because it will convince others. It will convince disinterested left leaning people to vote democratic because it will show them that we stand for something.

Also, it can convince independents because they pay attention to both sides and are often able to be swayed. In this last election, they got convinced that Hillary was evil. If we don't challenge the deplorable's narratives then we risk having them be the loudest voice in the room.

In rough terms, the Country is 45% left, 45% right and 10% flags-in-the-breeze. Those 10% end up being the decisive factor a lot of the time.

this is spot on, though I would put the numbers closer to an even 33% us, them and the "middle."

As you accurately note, they get more of the "middle" most often because even though is it often complete bullshit, they scream the loudest and relentlessly and that leads the dull, mushy middle to moo and head their way.

Hillary is a decent, extraordinarily qualified and hard working public servant, but decades of their screaming about her left even progressives to believe, for no good reason, she was some kind of ogre.

I had originally typed 33-33-33.

But after thinking about it, I went with 45-45-10. While about 1/3 identify as independents, it seems that many are hard leaners and vote pretty consistently one way or the other.

My take was that a narrower fraction are truly independents that sway with the breeze. We haven't had a presidential candidate break 55% of the vote in 30+ years and Reagan only broke that barrier once in the last 45 years.

That's why I think the true swing vote in the modern era is closer to 10% but we are on the same page.

About getting more of the middle.

I am afraid this is a cooked in advantage.

As the conservative party looking to hold onto the past, they are considered the default position (ie the status quo, ie the good old days etc.).

As the party trying to make progress, we represent change. It takes more convincing. I believe it can be done but we can't assume it will just happen naturally. It takes leadership and vision to bring people along.