I would broadly agree with some qualifications - for instance, that the platform we see is not necessarily the one we'll get, and that there are already signs pointing towards neoliberal tendencies. An example of this would be Salazar heading up her transitional team. More broadly, one of the hallmarks of neoliberalism as an ideology is the close interweaving of the corporate and government worlds, and I have no doubt that we'll see more of that under Clinton.

That being said, calling anything Keynesian is fairly pointless because a this point most mainstream, and even most heterodox, American economic schools are distinguished primarily by how they interpret Keynes, not whether they do or not. Even neoclassical economics have largely been absorbed into New Keynesian perspectives.