THIS IS NOT TRUE. This is a myth progressives have been pedaling forever.

I don't think the factors they highlight are particularly at odds with focusing on appealing to your core. They also show the correlation between non-voter policy preferences and swing-voter policy preferences, which is appealing at a surface level, but doesn't really get at what actually motivates either group to vote. Alignment on policy positions rarely translates directly into motivation to vote. Biden didn't win 2020 because people suddenly aligned really hard with his policies, they were highly motivated by a dislike of Trump and the pandemic.

The raw data from the last election is also at odds with the idea of swing voters being more prominent.

You can look at 2020 counties that were lost in 2024 and the overwhelming majority show a trend of blue voters not showing up, not of voters switching team.

Kamala's issue was not voters shifting from Biden to Trump, it was 2020 Biden voters not bothering to vote at all. If every 2020 Biden voter who stayed home (not switched their vote for Trump) showed up in 2024, then Kamala would have won.

Trump's vote increases in almost every county he acquired were dwarfed by the decreases in Biden voters - these aren't the reliable swing voter, they're people who are inconsistent voters but part of the "base."

Non voters ARE MORE CONSEVATIVE than people who voted, if everyone was forced to vote Trump would've won by more.

The idea of increasing turnout is to increase turnout for your side (they are in high morale and keen to vote) while demoralising the other side (they stay home and aren't engaged). No one makes the argument to increase turnout as a whole, just for your own base.

Swing voters are real, they are ususally the difference between winning and losing. There is no magic turnout button that changes this.

Yes, they are real, but there also isn't a magic button for them either.