No, if it was maximizing suppression bang for the buck it would be the Democratic precincts in swing states, not “swing precincts and states”, because electoral votes (except for 5—out of the 9 in Nebraska and Maine—that are determined by Congressional district) are decided by statewide (not precinct level) outcomes, so you get the maximum effect on the outcome by suppressing the vote in Democratic-leaning areas of swing states, not by targeting precincts that are near parity in the same states.
Sure, I was thinking in terms of the presidential; but its pretty similar for midterms, you'd still mostly want to target Democratic and not swing precincts, but those in swing congressional districts rather than swing states; precincts are typically on the several hundred to a few thousand people; congressional districts are several hundred thousand to just over a million people.
