That’s not unreasonable in theory, but it doesn’t match the evidence.
Nicholas Grossman
102

I reject, as not credible, any opinion surveys produced by Robert P. Jones’ PRRI. It is no secret that PRRI surveys addressing race and identity issues, including the survey referenced in your original post, are sponsored by George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Consequently, the press releases that accompany the data are presented to persuade opinions, not inform them.

During the 2016 campaign, PRRI produced an outrageous survey, within three weeks of election day, that suggested Hillary maintained a double digit lead over Trump with Independent voters breaking 16% in Hillary’s favor! Since PRRI embargoes their polling data for a period of one year after the survey, which includes the weighted samples, it is impossible to ascertain the credibility of their data as it correlates to the targeted demographics. Nevertheless, they rarely weight their samples based on party affiliation, and their unweighted samples always under-represent Republican voters.

Thomas Edsall of the N.Y. Times published a significant article that summarized a diverse collection of newly available post-election analysis by pollsters and political scientists, including the PRRI survey you cited. He concluded that Hillary Clinton lost because she failed to connect with her own constituencies; minority, young and single voters. Below is an excerpt from Edsall’s article.

“Sifting through the wreckage of the 2016 election, Democratic pollsters, strategists and sympathetic academics have reached some unnerving conclusions.”
“What the autopsy reveals is that Democratic losses among working class voters were not limited to whites; that crucial constituencies within the party see its leaders as alien; and that unity over economic populism may not be able to turn back the conservative tide.”

It is apparent that the intent of many these surveys referenced in Edsall’s article were commissioned to prove an accepted thesis among liberal and progressive pundits and pollsters that the election was the result of a “whitelash”, as Van Jones alluded to during CNN’s election night coverage. However, what they learned is that “economic populism” drove voters to Trump. In fact, Hillary’s own PAC, Priorities USA, found that “77 percent, of Obama-to-Trump voters think Trump’s economic policies will either favor “all groups equally” (44%) or the middle class (33%)”. Edsall also linked to Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg’s recent essay which concluded that the Democrats must address a serious “working class problem”.

“The Democrats don’t have a “white working-class problem.” They have a “working-class problem,” which progressives have been reluctant to address honestly or boldly. The fact is that Democrats have lost support with all working-class voters across the electorate, including the Rising American Electorate of minorities, unmarried women, and millennials. This decline contributed mightily to the Democrats’ losses in the states and Congress and to the election of Donald Trump.”