I know I'm beating a dead horse, because I always take the opportunity to bring her up in these conversations. But what you're getting at is covered pretty heavily by Rachel Bitcofer, the pollster who got the Blue Wave prediction almost exactly right prior to 2018 (and a couple of months ahead of any other pollster so she was way ahead of the norms). Her explanations of negative partisanship are really worth hearing out or reading. She's got a good interview on Majority Report from a while back and I think Salon did an interview with her a while back too. Essentially, by her theory, the independents that decide swing states aren't changing their minds from blue to red. But rather from "I need to go vote" to "I think I'll just stay home" and a big driving force for turnout can be negative partisanship which is to vote AGAINST someone rather than FOR someone. In a way oversimplified example, I'd point to how the incumbent party usually loses seats in midterms. Independents leaning toward the minority party have more urgency to turn up in those instances. But that's extremely oversimplified and I'd say to check out Bitcofer's actual words to get a better idea.
Side note: This absolutely co-signs what you're saying on turnout. And Bitcofer sees Latino outreach for "get out to vote" initiatives is an untapped resource Democrats should look to utilize more. It's also why I have some hopes that Bernie's targeting of younger generations that have historically been less reliable voters can turn into a successful strategy.