Before 2016 you had oligarchy on both sides of the U.S. aisle. In 2016 we had democracy/populism rising up from both left and right (Sanders and Trump). Trump toppled the oligarchic GOP primaries; Sanders was not able to do so, although he came close in 2020. Biden was the DNC oligarchy's answer to Sanders, for the DNC used its oligarchic resources to dramatically reshape the race after Sanders began winning in 2020. Harris was the DNC oligarchy's answer to Biden's poor debate performance. Harris' candidacy was expressly oligarchic rather than democratic, as she was an unelected candidate. — Leontiskos

It is a relevant brief account of recent U.S. history. I would just add that what you refer to as ‘oligarchy’ is likely an extremely complex agglomeration of political, bureaucratic, and corporate groups and forces. We do not know its exact structure and mechanisms, but it seems reasonable to assume that the ‘oligarchy’ progressively augmented its power and its detachment from the ‘demos.’ Otherwise, it is impossible to fully understand its chain of unprecedented missteps and risky strategies that led to Trump’s victory.

There are lots of things Trump voters were voting against, but I think much of it was tied up with the unabashed oligarchy of the DNC (which is now also bound up with progressive theories which are out of step with the demos). It sounds like Laclau sees populism as a quasi-revolutionary movement borne out of frustration with the status quo. That makes sense and I think it is reflected in the 2024 U.S. elections (as well as recent elections in Germany, Canada, France, and elsewhere).

(But with that said, it isn't necessarily revolutionary to elect the elected candidate over the unelected candidate in a democracy. Populism and democracy seem to very much go hand in hand in this case.) — Leontiskos

Your understanding of Laclau’s theory is quite similar to mine. He provides an elaborate conceptual framework for understanding the rare and precarious events of democratic eruptions.It is a valuable contribution to the discussion of our political realities, avoiding partisan clichés, stereotypes of mundane language, and biased media coverage. Another challenge is the incredible speed with which the political landscape shifts and the rapid alteration of related narratives. Who remembers Brexit or the COVID pandemic today? It is also quite frustrating to observe the reflections and commentaries of most of
pundits and academics. Many of them seriously argued that Trump’s election marked the revival of Nazism in the U.S. or he constituted a genuine threat to democracy. So, I believe that Laclau does not sufficiently elaborate on the affective component of the populist process of 'constructing internal frontiers and identifying institutionalized 'others.' His book was published 20 years ago, and he could not have predicted the ubiquitous spread of the 'woke' attitudes and the overflow of various aspects of populist phenomena.

But I remember that even amidst all the hubbub, the average Americans that I knew were not very concerned about it. — Leontiskos

That's one thing that can happen with Trump 2 administration, if everything would go nice and well also.

Clinton's approval rating and Trump's reelection show that, for better or for worse, the electorate didn't take such proceedings seriously. — Leontiskos

Infidelity in the end isn't at all an issue, if you know the politician himself. It's just a thing that tells something about the politician before we know him.

The media will undoubtedly portray Trump’s administration as a chaotic mess of incoherent policies. — Number2018

Indeed they will. Just like as actually the people inside the Clinton administration did and as the people inside the 1st Trump administration told how it was inside the White House. Quite chaotic and incoherent. I assume that Trump 2 will be similar. In the end, these administrations will simply appear as they arey, which is rather chaotic. Even so, a lot of those "incoherent" policies done by the incoming Trump administration will indeed get picked on by the next administration (just like many policies wered done with the Biden Administration) and hence will be a part of the long tradition of US policy in then end.