[@Vilageidiotx] - that was extremely informative. Thank you.

I want to clarify that I don't think it's as simple as people consciously thinking "fuck you guys". The vote isn't out of spite, but it is very much about feeling under-represented and dissatisfied, for reasons you've outlined significantly better than I could. On a subconscious level, people were very much swayed by a desire to disrupt the status quo, regardless of whether the alternative is likely to be worse. People will, after being downtrodden enough, take a really slim hope of improvement with a high chance of things going worse, rather than stick with the guarantee of the same stagnant status quo.

Perhaps the reason I see it this way is because of the narratives in the UK right now - both Scottish independence and Brexit were, in my view, thoroughly driven by these feelings, as was the rise of fiercely right-wing parties throughout Europe in recent years. It's a desire for change, for a shift in the stagnancy of politics for people who feel consistently under-represented, like a rubber band that's been stretched for too long finally snapping in the opposite direction. The problem is just that, because the dissatisfaction and frustration is all dealt with under the surface, subconsciously, that the influence of the rubber band snapping is, too, somewhat subconscious. It sways people towards eccentric, "breath of fresh air" political figures like Trump, or like Nigel Farage in the UK - they become compelling simply because they're [i]different[/i], even if "different" doesn't mean "better." And that attracts votes, it sways opinion every so subtly, but those subtle changes in the way you perceive each word they say propagate through to huge swings in actual votes on the day.

This is what I am saying is "stupid" and like a tantrum. I was being harsh; I completely understand why people are dissatisfied and why they'd be willing to take a chance on anything that feels different from the same old bullshit, anything other than the same old two parties who don't care. It's just that voting for something different just because it's different, even out of desperation, is really, really, [i]really[/i] dumb, precisely because "different" =/= "good". 

I think this factor is what swayed people towards Trump. After all, between Trump and Hillary, neither is telling an anti-elite story; they're both equally deplorable to the working class. Trump promises to bring back jobs, but anyone who actually believes that he has any real such plans or that he cares about the working class falls into the category of "a fucking moron" as opposed to what I was calling "a protest voter." And Trump's as "wall street"/financial elite as Clinton. 

So I think the narrative you outlined was correct - but what caused it to go that way was what I've outlined above. In the end, rational people from that area had little reason to truly believe either Clinton or Trump was going to do anything for them; the thing that made them lean towards Trump is just the fact that he was different, he was from outside the establishment, and people were attracted to that "breath of fresh air" as opposed to another stagnant, lifetime politician-type, even if the fresh air had as much an unmistakable tinge of filthy fuckin' lies as the stagnant pool swarming with flies.