Great job. Except for the title. There is nothing mad about the Republican Party. Angry, yes. Supported by people whose interests it does not serve. yes. But it is completely rational in addressing the issue that matters most to its members: identity.

Where you cite the 1964 convention as a starting point, I cite the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Same difference, I think. The Republican Party has become the party of scared men and white people. I'm not sure how that could have been prevented without denying equality to women and non-white Americans.

I seem to recall reading about intersecting interests as a key to political stability. If I'm a white man and a consumer and a worker, I might make common cause with non-white consumers and workers. But if my whiteness and/or maleness becomes important enough to me, my shared interests with other groups stop mattering. That's why I might vote for someone who says it's OK to be a white man even as he raises my prices and lowers my pay.

The Democrats contributed to the problem by demonizing men and white people. The party hasn't had a Sister Souljah moment since Clinton. Rather, the party has dealt smugly in toxic masculinity and white fragility. The Trump campaign captured this idea perfectly with "They care about 'they/them'; I care about YOU." When you walk into the voting booth to choose between the white guy who says it OK to be you and the black woman whose party says, without her objection, that you're a worthless sack of shit, what lever do you pull?