If Clinton had won the election and a Trump supporting woman wrote she believed Clinton won due to unattractive* young women living in their father’s basements while wasting their lives away. Would the message be well received by anyone but misogynists? Yet slamming men as in your article has become so much the rallying cry of Liberal/Progressives they fail to see themselves as misandrists.
I doubt if enough poor young men living in their mother’s basements voted to make a difference in favor of Trump. And given the point of your article is they are losers how can the corollary point they influenced a national election make sense?
I doubt if Liberal/Progressives have much hope of winning elections in the future unless they embrace half the population, men, and stop slamming them. You mentioned the “larger problem” needing to be addressed. I suspect you meant the economy as in rising tides raise all boats even guys living in their mother’s basements. If so, I agree. However, long before accomplishing a major overhaul of “Capitalism, USA Version™” (screwing most people over to profit the rich) I think Lib/Progs would do well to accept men, even poor ones.
*Unattractive for women = poor for men. Hence the analogy given you focused on poor men.