It depends how old you are and how many times the people you voted for in good faith did this:
View attachment 7717864
What's pretty fucked about it is US conservatism got it from both sides in the 2000's and 2010's. Regardless of how the liberal media tries to paint him and regardless of his actual screw-ups (there were many), Reagan made it cool to be conservative. From basically the end of Eisenhower until Reagan, Republicans were seen as many things, but the worst perception was "stick-in-the-mud." Nixon's victory in 1972 could not stand to the Democrats and their conglomeration of lazy Boomer hippies and academic commies.
It's hard to describe because it was so long ago, but Jimmy Carter was shilled hardcore by the left. To this day, academics and hardcore leftists talk about Carter as if he was simply misunderstood or too pure for the White House. However, if you ask regular people, they'll tell you that he was a wet fish and his policies did not work. Carter's approach to government was way too technocratic and the Democrats learned nothing from his failures. Then Reagan came onto the scene and shattered the stick-in-the-mud view of conservatism for about 20 years.
Bill Clinton "won" but had to work with the Republicans in Congress the whole time because of Newt Gingrich. To this day, if you bring up the name "Newt Gingrich" to liberals - especially academic ones - they have a visceral physical reaction and start talking about him like he was a useless person... even though he rallied Congress against the Clinton administration and forced him to play ball. Clinton was not a mega-liberal despite what some people might say.
Edit to add: I once had a professor ask a class if they knew of any actual historians who were politicians, with the obvious lead-up being that politicians don't know their history. I raised my hand and said "Newt Gingrich," to which the professor cringed because he knew I was right. He then moved the goalposts and said "active historians," which was bullshit because you're not going to be a professional historian and a politician at the same time. Try bringing up Newt Gingrich sometime, it works and it's hilarious.
Then came George W. Bush and the actual, factual neoconservatives. They fucked things up majorly - dropped the intel ball on 9/11, invaded Iraq, basically did fuck all on the culture front - and worst of all, they made conservatism fuddy-duddy again. Many of these Republicans were now old and complacent. They became buddy-buddy with their Democrat colleagues and pretty much feckless in the media game. Whatever you think about Obama, he knew that social media was important while the old guard Republicans shrugged.
When the Tea Party came out, they attacked both the Democrats for being flaming globohomos and the Republicans for going along with it. The Republicans told them to fuck off because the Tea Party threatened their power while the Democrats used the federal government to strangle the Tea Party, which one could argue led to the rise of Trump and right-wing populism. Trump tapped into the remnants of the Tea Party movement and revitalized the Republicans, making it cool to be conservative again. It helps that Trump delivers on a lot of his promises compared to previous conservative politicians who tended to sit on their fat asses after winning their elections.
I'm just rambling at this point and like what I wrote too much to delete it, but the reason Trump is so liked is because he's doing what he said he would do, he's
fun, and now the Democrats have become the old, fuddy-duddy, stick-in-the-mud, Ms. Finster fun police.
