Nah. My end game is much more about getting people to see the bigger picture. Whether Obama or Reagan or Clinton or Bush II had it the worst in terms of hyperbolic vitriol is pretty irrelevant. Ultimately all those politicians are judged by broader society for their performance. And crying about Obama being treated unfairly is pointless. The guy entered office on a big wave of popularity and he is leaving office with a solid approval rating. How his legacy ultimately get's written remains to be seen. But the guy was generally liked.
As for voter turnout, Ph or someone else tried to make the same claim a couple of weeks ago. The idea of lower voter turnout doesn't hold water at least in rural or ex-urban counties. For starters it simply was not universally true. There were counties where turnout was up, counties where it was level and counties where it was down. And even where you saw some lower turnout, that did not nearly enough explain Clinton's lower vote take relative to Obama's. We're talking 10, 15, 20 and even larger percentage point drops.
Further, even if you want to claim it was because of low turnout, whose fault is it? Don't the candidates need to give voters a reason to get up off their ass and vote? When you don't vote you are still making a statement.
