yes, I was being hyperbolic - Clinton successfully ate the Republicans' lunch by being a better conservative than them, so it seems like a consistent strategy. Democrats are more interested in appealing narrowly to reliable voters, rather than trying to appeal to people who refuse to vote, haven't ever voted, or other disenfranchised non-voters, which is a mistake because the number of people eligible to vote, but who don't reliably vote, make up a very large portion (so much that they make up the largest block of voters, larger than Dem or GOP voters in most elections - a reason electoral abstentionism seems like an unlikely strategy, since a majority already abstain with no significant impact to the government's sense of legitimacy).

Partly this is an issue of Dems being elitist, they are not into populist politics and prioritizing the lower classes in their rhetoric, and part of this is just basic electoral strategy and the kind of established, expert-approved approach to winning elections.