Will the WWC become a long time voter base for the Republican Party?

[hopper]

Haven't they already? They have been voting in large majorities for Republicans for a while now.

It's possible the GOP's WWC ranks expand beyond this election, but one election itself doesn't signify a permanent shift, particularly an election between the 2 most hated nominees in modern history, with one being uniquely unsuited for WWCs for numerous reasons. It's just as possible that if Trump doesn't deliver on his big promises and/or if Republicans overreach on things like Medicare, that they end up sending many of them back to the Democratic Party. It's not enough to just win them over once with lots of promises. Republicans/Trump also have to show them that Republicans can more of a positive difference in their lives than Democrats.

-Rethink HRC and Her supposed unique unsuitability for the WWC:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=257209.msg5487873#msg5487873

It's true non-college Whites are the swingiest voting group, and that this has always been so.

They probably won't be in the future though.  Democrats should cut their losses with these people and move on.  There are bigger, growing states to focus on...

The Dems can't ignore Non-College Whites in 2020 and win though. Its not happening.

[hopper]

-Things didn't change for Hillary as much as she changed them. She could have run the same campaign she did in 2008 and beaten Trump.

How things changed is also irrelevant. Her husband's record, the massive mistakes she made between 2009-2013, her weaknesses as a campaigner that prevented her from rising above that stuff, and tying herself to an administration that in some regions wasn't as respected as Obama himself (it didn't help that Obama was pushing TPP while she was running) all contributed to her failure to win.

You could try and argue that if she ran the same campaign, she'd have won, but running a different campaign may have also weakened her support among the constituencies her actual campaign meant to target with no guarantee she'd make up enough to win from others. And all of this again ignores the fact that Hillary Clinton had numerous problems (as I listed above) that were wholly separate from a campaign strategy she was capable of carrying out. For instance, she can come out strong against TPP and pro-building up manufacturing yet the people she is after don't believe her because she has created a thick layer of distrust to makes her campaign message meaningless - particularly against an opponent who effectively made part of his campaign about her own character deficits.

So yes, I'd say Bill's pro-trade and criminal justice record combined with the negative effects of her tenure as SoS were unique.

-Her husband's record is now most remembered for its fast-rising real wages, its extraordinary job growth, and a lack of U.S. troops bogged down in the Middle East. Again, here's what HRC's message should have been had she wanted to win:

Working men and women of this country,

You may think Trump knows how to repair the economy because "he's a businessman", "he says he'll bring back jobs", and "he'll fix the deficit". But how does raising taxes on those who are neediest among us in the form of onerous protective tariffs on the goods you buy in furtherance of corporate welfare for politically-connected businesses help the working class? How does right-to-work (which Trump has repeatedly supported) help raise wages for the American laborer? How does bringing back exactly the same failed trickle-down anti-union corporate welfare policies of Herbert Hoover and Calvin Coolidge restore to the laborer what he is rightfully deserving of? It doesn't. Rather, it enriches politically entrenched fat cats at your expense. Under Trump's policy of raising taxes on the imports you buy while helping cut your wages by crushing labor unions, you get hurt. There's a reason, after all, union leadership emphatically rejects Donald Trump and supports the tried and true policies of Mrs. Bill and Hillary Clinton. Under Clinton, wages rose, unemployment fell to 4%, and the job markets of Detroit and Tampa alike were both booming. Mr. Bill Clinton's wife can bring that back without any higher taxes on the goods and services you purchase. Trump can't do any of that. Vote him out.

The Democratic Party is the Party of Roosevelt. FDR was never in favor of Herbert Hoover's tried and failed idea of high protective tariffs on the goods and services you purchase. Instead, he cut tariffs on imports massively while getting firms to agree to wage increases for all working Americans. These are the policies with which Roosevelt flipped Youngstown from an absolute bastion of the Hooverite Republican Party to the stronghold of the Party of Jackson it is today. This was how FDR turned Macomb, Muskegon, and northern Minnesota to the party which fits them best today. And these policies of FDR are the very policies of the Democratic Party from the 1930s to today and, quite naturally, Mrs. Bill Clinton's wife. The Democrats work for you and your family. The Republicans work for the rich. Vote them out.

As for the deficit, Donald Trump calls for lower taxes on those who can most afford them, while not proposing any specific spending cuts worth more than a pittance. How can this reach a balanced budget? To do so, Trump must either massively cut spending for whom it serves most, or raise taxes on the middle class via onerous taxes on the imported goods and services you buy. Hillary Clinton opposes this big-budget-deficit, anti-working class, anti-poor, pro-corporate agenda. Unlike Donald Trump, Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton has a plan to balance the budget. Look at Donald Trump's website. He has no such plan. Hillary Clinton does -go to .....com. Mrs. Bill Clinton's wife supports higher taxes on those who can most afford them -those earning over $xxxxx- to pay for the largest public infrastructure investment since World War II. The obstinate do-nothing Republican Congress continues to block this agenda. Vote them out.

On foreign policy, Donald Trump is too muddle-headed to propose any coherent course but to lower our standing in the world. FDR supported the present system of international alliances, as he understood its great benefit the U.S. So does Hillary Clinton. Trump's sheer incompetence on matters of foreign policy shows he cannot be trusted with the nuclear button. With Clinton's steady hand, you know the nation will be safe and secure -just as it was in Bill Clinton's time. So vote Donald Trump out.

The Affordable Care Act may not be perfect, but do you have any idea what the Republicans will replace it with? Here's a hint: every Republican plan is less generous to the elderly and to the most needy than Obamacare is at present. The Affordable Care Act needs reform. But it does not need the kind of anti-patient changes the Republicans want. Vote them out.

Hillary Clinton will govern effectively with a unified Democratic Congress. So let's go ahead and elect one, leaving the failed Hooverite policies of the GOP behind.

She was stupid not to run on WJC's legacy. Had she run on Bill's criminal justice policies, she would have won a larger portion of the White vote while not losing any of the Black. What are Blacks going to do? Vote Republican? Meanwhile, concerned citizens who like the Democratic platform, but feel threatened by the breakdown of law and order in some inner cities can easily vote Republican.

Who are the overeducated elitist hacks put off by Trump, but favoring inner-city crime and free trade, going to do? Vote for Trump? They were going to vote for anybody but Trump. What concrete concessions was she even targeting elite Republicans with? Most elite Republicans aren't even fans of inner-city crime.

Hillary made 70% of Her campaign about Trump's well-documented character deficits. That was nuts.

No but they could just stay home.  Every African American that stays home is basically a lost vote for Democrats.

-Indeed. And Hillary 2016 succeeded getting a lot of young Black men to stay home, anyway (relative to 2012). So if that was going to happen no matter what she did, she might as well have focused on the voters in the Democratic coalition most at risk of flipping; e.g., Bernie Sanders supporters in Wyandotte.

A lot of black people under age 45 stayed home I think.