Donald Trump had ideas in his head, without any thought process, without any discussion with anyone as to how he intends to implement those ideas. By the time he’d clinched the nomination for the Republican Party, the ideas he floated around (immigration, war, debt, the economy, etc.) were just that, ideas. He could not explain – he did not explain – how he intended to implement any of them. It should also be noted that the media gave him a pass and never pressed him to provide details about any of the ideas he campaigned on. His opponent, on the other hand, had very well detailed plans which would address various issues the country was confronting.
Not only Hillary Clinton had vast knowledge on various aspects of government but she also had plans for the most pressing issues in the country at the time. That didn’t matter to the constituents. Although one might be quick to evoke the Trump phenomenon as a “scapegoat of explanation”, that was not the first time. In 2000 for instance, Republicans went to the polls to vote George W. Bush in office despite the fact the country had enjoyed a great economy under Bill Clinton in particular, the Democrats in general. Time and again, the constituents seem inclined to act against their interests just to support their political Party.
So, the idea that the constituents care about solution is just for conversation purpose; most would vote their party of affiliation irrespective of which Party has a better chance of providing the “solution” they desire. Whether they believe their Party is going to address the solution or is best capable to do so is a matter for psychologists to analyze; for several decades, the constituents in general, Republican constituents in particular have always voted for their Party even when it’s obvious their Party does not have or cannot provide a solution for the problem they claim to need a solution for.