Time.
The only way a disagreement over basic facts can be resolved is when the two sets of facts collide with reality and one is proven the stronger.
In this country we had a very divisive EU referendum with the winning Leave campaign pushing a set of alternative facts: "£350m for the NHS if we leave", "German industry will lobby to get us a favourable deal", "the EU is on the verge of collapse anyway", "Europe needs us more than we need them because we buy their products", "the ROTW will be lining up to sign trade deals with us" etc. etc., beating out the facts of the Remain campaign. Anyway, this delusion was rampant among government ministers and a small majority of the public and is only beginning to slowly dissipate now that Brexit negotiations have begun and fantasy is crashing into reality.
So with Trump: if he really did collude with Russia, and if he really is as awful and incompetent as Democrats believe, then the only thing they can do is wait for this to be exposed by the investigation and Trump's agenda. Bush won two elections and his incompetence crashing into reality permanently discredited neoconservatives and "compassionate conservatism". So with Trump.
The question is then what will trigger the "I told you so moment" where enough people believe a narrative to the point that there are consequences?
I think people were just tired of Bush when they finally forced him to share power. Maybe because enough people had died in Loiusiana and Iraq and that those fence splitters who went to Bush in 04 were done "giving hom a chance" with his war. The last straw was clearly when it was found out that enough people couldn't pay their bills so that they had to fire millions of people. Then, instead of the 45% who never believed him and the 3% that learned quickly knowing Bush sucked, those 5% who were just giving him a chance also acknowledged that Bush wasn't the right person. The other 46-47% lives were dependent upon their set of facts that the Republican Party's narrative was the only acceptable one. However, they weren't enough to prevent a reasonable response to the facts.
Now, it seemed those people who gave Bush a chance wanted to give "someone new" a chance. What will it take for enough people to be convinced of Trump's malfeasance and that there is an alternative