It's worth bearing in mind that, in every Republican primary held so far, the majority has voted against Trump. If "the voters" are indeed deciding, they are deciding against Trump, not for him. I think his success so far has less to do with a new political paradigm than it does with the simple mathematics of an unusually large field of candidates. The Republicans had hoped that having a large field would a) give them a lot more publicity during the primary season (they were right), and b) split the opposition to Jeb Bush and give him a greater aura of legitimacy when he emerged victorious, compared to Clinton's relative coronation (they were wrong).