Did 2016 re-align the swing vote back to the white-working class?

[Burke859]

One interesting trend in presidential politics is the manner in which, over the past 50 years, the swing vote in presidential elections has been focused either within the white-working class voting bloc, or within a combination of college-educated whites and non-white voters. 

From 1968 to 1988, successful presidential candidates seemed to be the ones who could harness the votes of the culturally conservative, blue collar whites (think "Reagan Democrats").  This was true of Nixon, and true of Carter, who defeated Ford by being the heartland candidate, and then true of course of Reagan and of Bush in 1988 by being the heir to Reagan running against a coastal elite.

Then from 1992 to 2012, it was college-educated whites and non-whites who were the deciding voters.  We had Bill Clinton stealing the suburban vote from Republicans and winning soccer moms, George W. Bush winning wealthy exurbs and "security moms," and Barack Obama winning the Creative Class whites and driving up non-white voter turnout to historic levels.

So was 2016 a fluke, or was it the beginning of another 20-25 year period of both parties fighting over a single voting bloc at the presidential level?  Also, how does this play out given that WWC voters are supposedly an increasingly diminishing share of the voting population?

[Sumner 1868]

They were always the most swingy voters.