The true losers of 2016, besides America, are the pollsters. What the fuck happened? Did everyone decide at the beginning of 2016 to just lie when people ask them how they're going to vote. Jaysus.
The pollsters rely on a number of factors (which I don't understand well enough, so I'll leave them vague) which are simply outdated. For example, they do not take into account the ever-growing number of people who have all but opted out from traditional media, and who instead rely on social-media-based alternatives. A decade ago, the amount of negative publicity Trump received from the media would be the kiss of death for his campaign long before the primaries. But that's just not the case anymore.
This is more or less what happened with Brexit, too. While exceptions apply, the division was mostly between experts and those who have (quite famously by now) had enough of experts. When society as a whole begins to fail certain groups, these groups seek alternatives. Whether you consider them reasonable or not, people like militant MRAs/MGTOWs, the alt-right, or campus SJWs feel that the current order of matters doesn't work for them. They seek alternatives, and when they're sufficiently pissed off, they'll take any alternative that seems like a stern departure from "the system". Such behaviour is difficult to predict unless you're already on the inside of these discontent group.
Also, more and more people cleave to their own kind either on the internet or (for the older generation) in their homes. The explosion of TV channels and internet groups leads counterintuitively to less choice as they can filter out what they don’t want to hear, and as the media seems incapable or unwilling to screen out, (or culpable in) the outrageous lies that politicians increasingly use to shock/scare/irate people to vote for them, this isolation with its lack of balance is hard to breach and it would seem harder to gauge.
Many people (such as my mother) also appear to have a sense of guilt that their views have hardened, whilst others become entrenched and defensive, so if reached by pollsters would probably refuse to answer or downright lie, further skewing results.
I don't agree with this part. There was very thorough fact-checking from the media throughout the election, and anyone who was so inclined could do a cursory Google search and discover the extensive documentation and debunking of Trump's endless lies. In some cases, you didn't even need to go online, as the TV news shows fact-checked Trump in their chyrons. I'm sure we've all seen these hilarious pictures:
For some people, reality simply can't overrule what their intuition tells them. They live in a "feels>reals world" to borrow Rushy's phrasing. Trump
feels like he's honest. How could someone so seemingly impulsive and outspoken, always willing to bark out how he feels no matter how people react to it, be a liar? And Hillary
feels like she's dishonest. How could someone so shrewd and guarded, always carefully choosing her words and trying to maintain good political form at all times, be someone who tells the truth more than the plain-spoken Trump?
That's a cynical outlook, and while I have no doubt that many of Trump's fans fit it perfectly, it can't be entirely accurate. What SexWarrior said about people simply being disconnected from the mainstream media and/or desperate enough to go with a wild card that promises real change is more likely. I guess it's hard to care that much about whether or not Trump mocked a disabled reporter when he's the only candidate telling you that he can help you out.