It's the turnout, stupid

[Althea]

So, the big narrative now is that Trump tapped into the anger of white, working class voters, who turned out in droves to make him our President.

If not for a total of 107,000 votes in 3 states (MI, WI and PA), Hillary wins the election. She woefully underperformed Obama's 2012 #'s in those states, while Trump's increase over Romney's #'s was statistically insignificant.

Democratic dislike for Clinton and lack of enthusiasm for her decided this election.

Which lays the foundation for what Democrats are debating right now: do they need to expand the message, to appeal to what are now seen as "Trump voters"? Or do they just need to give their own base more reason for enthusiasm, boosting turnout and getting those voters who sat this one out back to the polls?

Personally, I'd like to see the Democrats reclaim the mantle as the party of the middle class and working people. I don't want future elections to be minorities against whites, the coasts against the heartland, cities against rural. But Democrats don't really need to change their message that much. In fact, the smart strategy is probably more about increasing turnout.

I think their message is fine....and it's exactly what you quoted above. The overwhelming problem here is that 46% of eligible voters refused to vote. Included in that group are those who never vote, but also those who promised not to vote for Hillary. After they saw the super delegate debacle, coupled with internal private DNC communications proving the nomination was rigged.....this demographic decided to teach the party a lesson. They were willing to let Republicans walk back every advance that was made in the last 8 years in exchange for delivering a strong message.

So the question is...did they learn the obvious lesson? There's nothing wrong with the message. There is, as you said, a problem with turnout. Republicans are NOT a majority mindset in this nation.