After spending too much money and too many hours on the campaign, I felt stunned at the outcome. But as I thought more, I realized that the outcome had really been decades in the making and all the “inside baseball” Democratic commentary about the election was missing the real lesson. I started with the certain fact that Trump voters are not all alike; there are many sub-groups. Yes, there are some who fit Hillary’s definition of “deplorable”… racists and bigots, etc. ... and they would vote for Trump no matter what. The rest are people who in their daily lives are as kind and responsible and good as anyone else. So then my question became: Why are variations on an anti-government brand, from the Tea Party to Trump, appealing to enough people in these quite different subgroups to be a national force at all, let alone to win a presidential election?

Well, it turns out the answer is obvious: Between 1948 and 1980, worker productivity in the U.S. grew by 108% and worker wages grew by 94%, a reasonably fair share of economic growth produced by workers (literally: “worker productivity”) going to workers. Then, between 1980 and 2018, worker productivity in the U.S. grew by 70%, while worker wages grew by 11.6%, not even close to a fair share. During this period, CEO pay grew by 940% and the stock market grew by 2,200%. So, the lived experience of most Americans is that since 1980, the wealth created by improved worker productivity has gone almost entirely to anyone but the workers themselves. By 2022, the top 10% of Americans held 68% of all net worth, while the bottom 50% held 2.6%. The top 10% of Americans currently hold over 92% of the value of all stock. A RAND Corporation study found that over these four decades, $47 trillion that would have gone into worker’s paychecks if the pre-1980 ratios had held, had instead gone to the top 1%. That study found that, for example, “If income distribution had remained as equitable as it had been in the first post-war decades” the bottom 90% of workers would have received 67% more pay in 2018 alone, a 67% raise for 90% of workers in just one year!

So, the lesson: Since about 1980, the Promise of America — of fair reward, increasing opportunity and a better future — has been broken for the great majority of Americans. Is it really surprising that they noticed and had a reaction?

This change in America happened on purpose. Data from 2020 is that corporate lobbying spends $34 for every $1 of union and public interest lobbying combined. Peer reviewed academic research from Princeton has found that “Average citizens and mass based interest groups have little or no effect on US government policy” while “elites and organized business interests” have dominant effect. This money from rich people and corporations buys many things from the government, including:

■The top marginal federal income tax rate was 91% from 1948-1964. From 1965 to 1981, the top rate was 70%. The top rate then (at the time of Reagan) dropped steeply and has averaged in the mid-30 percent range ever since.

■In 1980 the top marginal corporate tax rate was 46%, today it is 21%.

■And then there’s reduced capital gains taxation and a thousand other benefits only to the top.

Economists call this the “Pre-distribution of wealth”: the government sets the rules for financial and economic activity, and those rules have been heavily influenced by and show great favor toward, the already wealthy and powerful. The result is a large swath of Americans see a government of the few, by the few and for the few. Most of the working class see “government” and the rest of “the system” as not theirs — it’s foreign and far away and out of touch. In this situation, much of that huge swath has tuned out and doesn’t understand or pay much attention to government at all. They just know their own experience: falling behind. In their frustration and sense of betrayal, they look for whom to blame. That is why so many are susceptible to right wing lies and to narratives that fit with their distrust and sense of betrayal, their real hurt. In this context, it is precisely Trump’s attitude of disdain toward the status quo, toward the norms and the rules, that has such appeal to so many. Most Trump voters, even the good people, voted for that attitude, not for any set of policies.

As Democrats wrestle with how to move forward, the goal has to be to genuinely restore that promise of fairness and opportunity in a way that most people feel it. Any effort has to start there.

Kevin Lake lives in Northampton.