The part you're missing is that a very large number of voters (on both political sides) expect nothing but outright grift and corruption from both parties. And they're not wrong to do so.
Remember, Trump won both times against a candidate who was anointed by the powers that be, not chosen by the people. (Hillary Clinton at least went through the motions of holding primaries, but Kamala Harris didn't even have that).
So people say - out of the two corrupt parties, I might as well vote for the one that isn't actively attacking me.
Keep in mind that Democrats will declare you an outcast if you disagree with any single line of the party agenda - and they're currently pushing at least 3 ideas each of which is strongly rejected by some (independent) fraction of the voterbase.
I agree with the corruption part. After all "drain the swap" was an effective election slogan.
The attack part is just a hyperbole. The leader of MAGA will openly call for people being jailed or primaried if they disagree.
I also get where you are coming from. I have seen this play out 3 times. A non-establishment candidate comes in promising change and removing corruption. Very good at agitation and rousing people by talking about how their government has failed them. Promising to make things better.
But once in power things take a nose dive. The candidate and the party members are even more corrupt. They believe grift and corruption is the norm so there is nothing wrong in being overly and openly corrupt.
And despite the blatant corruption supporters keep making excuses for the behavior. "At least they won against the establishment" or "at least they are in my corner" but often they cannot point to examples to how their lives are better. In most cases they either point to policies which are making lives better for a selected set of people i.e. corruption or just devolve into whataboutism along party lines.
In most cases it takes at about a decade for people to see that their lives aren't any better and this "non-establishment" candidate is even worse. By that time serious damage to the government infrastructure has already been done. There is no coming back.
Sooner or later this behavior will turn US into a third world country where government employees demand bribes openly. But hey, "both parties are corrupt" so why not have partisan and corrupt government employees too.
Remember, Trump won both times against a candidate who was anointed by the powers that be, not chosen by the people. (Hillary Clinton at least went through the motions of holding primaries, but Kamala Harris didn't even have that).
So people say - out of the two corrupt parties, I might as well vote for the one that isn't actively attacking me.
Keep in mind that Democrats will declare you an outcast if you disagree with any single line of the party agenda - and they're currently pushing at least 3 ideas each of which is strongly rejected by some (independent) fraction of the voterbase.