1. This is a message board. We always talk in generalities. I'm not going to make any assumptions about "all Trump voters" or red-pilled young men. But unless our posts are going to become academic papers, we talk about large groups of people in general.
2. Further, I wasn't even talking about Trump voters being MAGA. Rather, I was focusing on the MAGA part of Trump's support. In general, I'm more concerned about MAGA than low-information voters on the margins. The latter are of intensely more interest to political campaigns, as they should be in the electoral college farce we call a democracy, but MAGA drives the coalition. The non-MAGA Trump voters basically ignore the MAGA part.
3. Just because people say their primary concern is the economy, doesn't make it so. Overwhelmingly Trump support in a given area is predicted by the amount of racial diversity, and in particular, the derivative of that diversity. Diversifying areas have become huge basins of MAGA disaffection. Not because people are broke, but because they don't like what they are seeing.
And one piece of evidence on the disingenuity of the "it's the economy" BS is their attitudes toward the economy right now. As many, many people have pointed out, MAGAs sure don't act like they are strapped for resources. The economy doesn't look terrible. People are generally happy with their own financial situation. To the extent that people are dissatisfied with the economy, it's in large measure a projection of assumptions onto other people. And boy isn't that an easy way to disguise other sentiments that are more noxious. MAGAs almost entirely complain about things that are far away from them: the border, and the distant economy -- and oh, migrants taking over small towns, which has the advantage of being largely unobservable. The problem with the Springfield narrative is that they named the place. It boomeranged because the lies could be easily detected.