I'm not even sure what you are trying to argue at this point. The republicans played to a sense of white aggrievement over the 40 years since the 70's while us

I'm not even sure what you are trying to argue at this point. The republicans played to a sense of white aggrievement over the 40 years since the 70's while using the political power given to them in the name of that aggrievement to disempower the people that gave it to them. I agree that he does speak to how middle and lower class whites still feel aggrieved but he does it in a way is still consistent with white privilege. You mentioned Arlie Hochshchild in another comment. Did you catch her comment about how Trump is playing the white knight role and that he shames everyone but white men? What about her "deep story" explanation? She's said that in two different interviews that I've heard her in. The one thing that she doesn't include, because its outside the scope of what she's doing, is the extent to which these people are complicit in the construction of their own circumstances. If you only look at this as an economic class struggle it's impossible to explain the reason that people supported parties that were explicitly opposed to their self interest. The class based explanation of the exploitation of poor people without including race is incomplete at best and disingenuous at worst. It's "safety net" in that he's going to get some "safety net" for "you" and not "them". You have to be willingly ignoring that to not see it. EDIT: Saying that the southern strategy was only for pro segregationists in the 60's and early 70's is so demonstrably false that it makes me think you are purposefully being misleading. It BECAME the Republican mainstream. It didn't go away. It won.