At the risk of stereotyping a bit, Trump supporters are about to get screwed over like they have long demanded to be.
The American social safety net was already horribly underfunded.

However, the real gutting of the social safety net are about to start.
While previous Republican Administrations just wanted to let programs that help the poor degrade incrementally, the Trump Administration has taken a hatchet to them.

To name a few damaging policy initiatives: a proposal to punish immigrants for participating in programs like Head Start; closing a Department of Justice office that was created to make legal aid more accessible; repealing guidance to judges that suggested they consider an individual’s ability to pay a fine before allowing her to languish in jail; imposing work requirements and time limits on people who need assistance with health care, housing, or food.
Two experts who have been deeply immersed in anti-poverty policy throughout their careers agree that since the Johnson administration launched its Great Society programs in the 1960s there has never been a more politically dangerous moment for those who are struggling to make ends meet in America.
“We’ve been through things before that we thought couldn’t get worse. But this right now is just one of a kind,” says Georgetown University law professor Peter Edelman...
...Trump’s budget would cut more than $300 billion from Medicaid, taking away health care from millions of people; $200 billion from student aid; and $200 billon from the SNAP program (food assistance), which currently has an average benefit of just $1.40 per person per meal. It would cut rental assistance—which currently reaches only one in four eligible families—jeopardizing more than 500,000 subsidized households, and eliminate the fund for public-housing repairs, even though there is a backlog of between $26 billion and $40 billion to fix things like leaky roofs and bad wiring. It eliminates the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps at least 6 million households with utility bills. It cuts $72 billion from federal disability programs, saving less than the cost of Republicans’ recently passed tax cut for heirs of multimillion-dollar estates.

For the sake of brevity I'll focus on Medicaid and SNAP.
Historically, Republicans favor huge cuts to food stamps and view Medicaid as welfare.

Republicans want to roll back the Medicaid expansion, cap federal Medicaid spending increases, and add work requirements, drug testing, time limits, copays and premiums to some state Medicaid programs. But almost no one else wants to do these things.

The Republican plan for food stamps would kick an estimated 1 million people off the rolls.

The proposal to reauthorize the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would subject more enrollees to “work requirements,” and would require states to set up training programs for 3 to 5 million people who might be unable to find suitable private sector work.
Democrats say the work requirements proposal could potentially deny benefits to 3 percent of enrollees in 2028, which could amount to nearly 1 million people that year.

The Republican response is to deny that anyone will go hungry, when there obviously will be some that will. Meanwhile, work requirements for farm subsidies are practically nonexistent.

Any farmer who makes less than $900,000 a year in income, or $1.8 million for a couple, is eligible for ARC and PLC payments. SNAP recipients must make less than $15,684 a year for one person or $21,120 for two people to receive any benefits.

Personally, I've never had a problem feeding people that are hungry, but then I'm not a Republican.
Nearly two-thirds of SNAP participants are children, elderly, or people with disabilities. Around three-quarters of adults who participated in SNAP in a given month worked either that month or worked in the year before or the year after.
Most of the states with a large percentage of people getting food stamps are red states.

As bad as the food stamp cuts are, the cuts to Medicaid will be worse.
The Republican justification is that poor “able-bodied adults” are living large on the public dole by being able to sometimes see a doctor. The reality is something entirely different.

Buttressing the liberal argument, a recent Kaiser Family Foundation analysis found that of the nearly 25 million non-elderly Medicaid recipients, a majority are already working, meaning they qualify for Medicaid (and thus can’t afford insurance) even though they are employed, which allows them to work these jobs and still get coverage. Meanwhile, of those who are not employed, most report serious health and other impediments to working, meaning the obstacle isn’t dependency or a lack of motivation.

How dare those poor people get food and medical care!
Next they'll all want ponies.
Here's the irony.

Such requirements are likely to be imposed in states carried by Trump. The Post reports that 10 states are already trying to get permission to impose them, almost all of them red states. This, among other things, leads Harold Pollack, a health-policy expert at the University of Chicago, to conclude that “Medicaid work requirements may hit Trump country hardest.”

Republican Kentucky went first, and an estimate 95,000 impoverished people will lose health care.

The plan strips Medicaid coverage from most adults who fail to comply, including those who do not complete paperwork on time or report “changes in circumstances” quickly enough.

Those with the most to lose from the Medicaid cuts are children in rural areas and small towns.


So why would these people vote to screw themselves? Because they didn't believe the Republican politicians when they said "We are going to screw you."

We spoke a good deal longer about the Affordable Care Act, and the possibility of repeal. Mills said she had gone into the voting booth confident that Republicans wouldn’t dismantle the law, despite their promises. How could they, when people like her had become so reliant on it?

OTOH, they did believe Trump when he obviously lied to them.

Many exchange enrollees thought their plans were too expensive, and many beneficiaries of the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion didn’t realize their free health insurance was the result of Obamacare. And Marketplace enrollees told KFF they trusted Trump to “craft a plan that would work better for them.”