There have been many excellent post-election analyses since Trump’s improbable win, most of have which have identified the disaffected working class and the failure of the Democrats’ politically correct identity politics as the driving factors.
But one thing that seems to be overlooked is the Tea Party, the reasons for its beginnings, and its underlying anti-establismentarianism in this election.
It was not just the failure of the Democrats’ urban-centric political focus on minorities, women, and income inequality that deep-sixed Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Walking it back, what has outraged so many grassroots conservatives was the phony conservatism under George W. Bush, culminating in the financial crisis of 2008. It pushed them overboard to no longer get fooled by the Republican establishment that had been basically a milder form of the big-government progressivism that had taken over the Democratic Party following the loss of Hubert Humphrey in 1968 to Richard Nixon. It was that crushing loss that sent Democrats on a far-left trajectory for decades to come.
Bush did nothing to cut back the size and growth of government. Instead, he actually expanded it through his unfunded Medicare Part D prescription drug program and the “No Child Left Behind” federally mandated education program. There were no efforts at all to rein in spending and the size of the federal government. And the war with Iraq added untold billions to the ever expanding annual federal deficits.
Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” was liberalism in disguise. From “Decision Time for the GOP Elite” at AT:
Remember that the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress during the presidency of George W. Bush and yet nothing was done to control the size, scope, or cost of the federal government.