Protests cost money: Transportation, organization, signage, etc. these "spontaneous" occurances at town hall meetings, on college campuses, outside (and inside) government offices require some level of funding. It appears there are common themes that appear across the range of protests. For example, the protests at UC Berkeley featured "outsiders" bent of violence and destruction according to those familiar with the activities there.
So, are the people that backed the Presidental candidate who lost recouping their "investment" by funding protests to disrupt the new administration and introduce a generally negative tone in the country? Far fetched, I think not; after all, the candidate not only lost the election, but the family "foundation" collapsed and the family reputation is in a downward spiral. Supporters may be seeking retribution for their failed efforts.