The American farmer has called bullshit on Washington and in doing so delivered it its worst nightmare. Photo / AP
As the world tries to figure out just how the hell Donald Trump won the US Presidency, I must say I've found the commentary and literature around this compelling.
To me the fallout has been just as stimulating as the election itself.
Among the glut of handwringing and regret, among the doomsday predictions and threats of a mass migration of US citizens to any other part of the world other than their own, the deluge of post-analysis has revealed a common thread; rural discontent.
It's not the pollsters, it's not late swings or early calls - they're all factors, sure - but the overriding explanation as far as I can ascertain is the sheer dislike, often hatred, of the political establishment by those in the American hinterland.
Finally there was an alternative and they went for it hook, line and sinker.
The American farmer has called bullshit on Washington and in doing so delivered it its worst nightmare.
There have been three pieces I've read in particular that highlight the issue.
The first is an article by Edward Speed in the Rivard Report called 'A Visit to Trump's America', The Guardian's John Harris wrote a piece called 'How the Midwest was Won', and senior director of user experience at CQ Roll Call, Patrick Thornton, has penned an opinion on the bubble that is rural America.
As we now know, the Midwest was the key battleground and it was the Midwest that was won by Trump.
In the last week people have been asking why states like Michigan and Wisconsin swung from Democrat to Republican, given the recent predilection of voters from those states, and many others, siding with the blue team.
The answers proffered by these writers centre around what I've grouped under three categories; money, conservatism and rejection.
By money, I really mean jobs. According to some economists the Midwest's economic woes have been beset even further by globalisation; downsizing and outsourcing - all the things we hear and read about over here have reached a crescendo in the States.
As farms were sold and factories closed many small communities either vanished or are hanging on by a thread. Economic decline has crippled a massive sector of the population and the problem only seems to be getting worse. As Harris wrote, "Rural became a synonym for poor".
But while economic fortunes can change in a relatively short period of time, attitudes can be a little harder to dismantle.
Thornton, a Midwest native, has recalled his upbringing and subsequent move to the city.
He talks of what I've deduced to be an 'us and them' mentality; the urban population has a way of both lauding and often unwittingly patronising rural Americans, talking up their existence as somehow more 'real' than those in the cities.
But, as something of a self-fulfilling prophecy, he argues all this really does is excuse the rural population from seeing and experiencing the rest of the nation, of understanding the many different attitudes that exist in society and ultimately leading to a glut of votes for a racist bigot through a blatant refusal to accept any kind of change.
But when you feel rejected and let down by the very people you vote into office, or at least the very people who should be there to protect your interests, is it any wonder you cling desperately to old values?
Speed says the writing was on the wall for a Trump victory months ago.
He saw first-hand how agricultural Ohio was overwhelmingly Trump country, a replica of the prevailing sentiment he'd seen in rural Texas.
They feel so distant and removed from the growing culture of 'offendedness' and entitlement from people who buy their produce in grocery stores but don't know or care where it came from, they'd do anything to cut the head off that particular snake.
It appears while the so-called Coastal Elite have copped the blame for Trump winning the White House, a large chunk of the narrative can be found in that portion of the nation that the politicians seemed to forget, or in the very least take for granted - although clearly not all of them.
As Harris so concisely put it, there was "a fatal detachment from the places where politics is actually played out".
And then consider the recipe of small town economic hardship, the hoary old 'urban/rural divide' chestnut and the inherent conservatism of communities under pressure and ask yourself if it sounds just vaguely familiar?