This is certainly a different take on the presidency of Mr. Trump. Most other pro-Trump articles lack any logic, but this article is making some good points.
My hypothesis is that Mr. Trump entered the R primary as a publicity stunt. He expected to finish third or fourth place, then go back to business, and say "I tried." He did very little analysis of middle America for he is not one of them. It was only a coincidence his rantings found a political base. And here we are today.
I'm not buying into your claim that Mr. Trump did things for the USA. For example, he could have brought in laws to prosecute companies and wealthy people for the hiring of illegal immigrants. That would have dried up the immigrant flow. But he left that part of the American economy wide open, putting all the blame on immigrants.
The only real wrong point of your article is the reference to socialism. In 1969, Canada moved a significant part of its economy from private hands to public. We put in a government paid health care system. That was 51 years ago, and we have not turned into a Venezuela. Conservative thinkers just cannot explain that.
One thing I liked about your article is your voting record. You are frustrated voter. Maybe you might be interested in a new kind of democracy, one that would not see the rise of the likes like Mr. Trump and Ms. Clinton.
Before the Bible-holding photo-op, I was giving Mr. Trump a 50% chance of winning the presidency. But when I saw that, I thought, "I think this could bring out voters who normally do not vote." A few hours later, army generals starting speaking out. Now the D's could run a fencepost and have a 90% chance of winning. But they still could screw the election up.
One thing is for sure: there is a muck of a fess to clean up.