Donald Trump represented a break from the political elite

The argument

Americans believed that the problems politicians claim to have a solution for are problems created by the political elite. These include inequality, poverty, war, drugs, racism, and immigration. This kind of elitism is represented by politicians such as Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump represented the opposite of this group. Many of Trump's voters claimed they were actually voting "against Hillary", rather than for him specifically. They did not believe Trump was a qualified candidate, however voted him due to his anti-establishment outlook.

Context

In political theory, the elite are the richest, most powerful, best-educated, or best-trained group in society.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Trump is not a break from the political elite, but rather a member of the elite himself. The combined wealth of the Trump family and administration cabinet members is extremely high. His "anti-establishment" cabinet actually owns more wealth than the annual GDP of 87 countries.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The premise reports what voters believed, which is evidence about perception rather than about any elite's role in the problems listed, and it does not distinguish this candidate from the party and institutions she had long belonged to — a description that would fit most of the field. [Rejecting P2] The reported 'voting against Hillary' motive is the argument's strongest material, but the anti-establishment framing pulls toward a different position: if voters chose him for what he stood against in general, that is the sibling claim that he spoke to their anxieties; if for his stated programme, it is the other sibling. The counter also disputes the premise on its own terms — a candidate of considerable wealth surrounded by an unusually wealthy cabinet belongs to an elite, so the break was one of style and affiliation rather than of class, a distinction the argument never draws.