The South is a notoriously evangelical region, so it should have gone to Ted Cruz or another candidate who focused more on social/religious issues. Trump was mostly focused on economics in the Upper Midwest, though.
No, absolutely not. Trump's major selling point to GOP primary voters wasn't so much economics (although many liked his message there obviously) but that he was a fighter who would unashamedly and outrageously attack the liberal media and liberal cultural elites. Many, many evangelical voters in the South felt that the cultural progress under the Obama administration had put their very way of life at risk and they were excited by a candidate who was fighting dirty against it.
I agree with this, you cannot under estimate the siege mentality on the right and the feeling going back to Bush that Republicans lack a backbone to defend themselves from the left, much less go on the offensive.
As an additional point, this forum has historically failed to understand the importance of the immigration issue as it relates to the base and this is a factor across much of the South especially, particularly in the era of migrant labor being so widespread and the sense of jobs displacement and being blamed for declining wages in low skilled, non-college fields. Guess where Trump's strongest support came from? Those same people would express this concern openly.
How do these voters feel about social issues. Because in white working class Massachusetts/RI and across New England white working class (lower-middle class) areas, I have experienced an apathy towards social issues like abortion and ssm and the reasons republicans did poorly there in the past is because no-one cared about these issues and economics were never going to be a vote winner for them.
Meanwhile, Trump spoke about Immigration and played into racial anxiety and the idea that latinos are taking their jobs (which sometimes happen) and their neighbourhoods are becoming less white ethnic and increasingly of a foreign culture. This was accompanied with economic issues like decline of industry which brought even those who don't care but don't support immigration into the trump fold.
I assume in the south, there would be a divide between evangelicals and non-evangelical working class vote? But with Trump (immigration) and Obama (race) the non-evangelical working class vote became increasingly republican, while the evangelicals were always solidly republican?
In the South both groups would be strongly conservative on social issues and thus why you saw consistent gains from 2000 onwards, with an acceleration of existing trends. It is easy to overlook now, but Bush's performance in places like Arkansas and West Virginia were considered amazing for the time and relative the popular vote especially.
You are right that outside the South these non-college whites are apathetic or even hostile to social issues, with many being Catholic or lapsed Catholic and thus rather secular in their outlook. Trump's success is owed to the fact that he was able to rally such strong support among a group of voters that Republicans previously had little to offer on economics and obviously the culture wars didn't interest them much.
The two groups are both conservative on social issues, but it's a different sort of social conservatism. One group tends to be a lot more "churchy" when it comes to things like cursing, drinking, and sex, while the other group is definitely not. Also, while both groups are generally pro-life and oppose gay marriage, the way those issues are discussed is at least a little different.
