I don’t know why anyone has strongly likes or dislikes ‘personally’ any public figure they’ve never met, certainly any figure in the world of politics where you simply can’t be the total mr/ms nice guy and your policies will absolutely lead to some people finding reasons to dislike you personally, or overlook your flaws.
During the campaign comparisons of Trump and Bill Clinton were rejected with’but Bill Clinton isn’t on the ballot!'. But now for the time being neither is Trump. Lots of people overlook Bill Clinton’s sexual misconduct up to and including an accusation of forcible sexual intercourse, and find him a ‘likable rascal’. I’m also speaking of regular people who’ve never met BC. I don’t find it so breathtaking if some regular people like Trump ‘personally’. Again it has this strange correlation to agreeing or disagreeing with the message and associations and symbols of the politician in question, how much one ‘likes’ politicians they don’t actually know.
I know a criminal (who is currently in jail) and he LOVES Trump! I also know some other “criminal types” - people who do not like to follow laws or rules who also are big Trump fans.
I’ve never met Trump but it wouldn’t surprise me to hear he’s likable in person. Even his opponents have to acknowledge he’s a top notch salesman and you can’t do that without being likable.
From where did you get your knowledge of Trump? Who informed you of this blatant narcissism, and proud anti-intellectualism? The media outlets? Hillary worshippers? People who got their ass kicked during the Presidential campaign? Is it possible that they twisted the truth in order to promote another candidate? Do you believe you’ve received both/all sides of the issue? Have you ever spent time with Trump one-on-one, or in a small group? Do you ever question your sources of information? Especially when you find that you can’t wrap your head around liking him as a human being, but other people can? What part of the equation haven’t you been given by your usual sources of information?
Trump is obviously a counter-puncher, and the people he counter-punched may not like him. Many media outlets, and Democrats, complained when Trump would defend himself. He can’t do that to our pledges. Only we can do that to our pledges.
Then you’ve gotten most of your information thru the media outlets. A snippet here, a snippet there, add in a bit spin, a pinch of bias, and presto your opinion was formed. Good to know.
Is there any possibility that the media outlets might not have provided you with full disclosure? Do you remember all of those interviews they had with Trump’s friends, or acquaintances? I don’t either.
Some people apparently like Trump as a person, and you lack the information to explain this phenomena. I would suggest that maybe you should expand your information base. Or not.
What constitutes more than a “snippet” to you? Some of his speeches have been covered from beginning to end, his performances in the debates were covered in their entirety, etc. What do you consider the minimum amount of time to watch HIM speaking before forming an opinion about any of his personal characteristics?
He’s had ample opportunity over the years to display positive characteristics, if he had any. Guess it boils down to his negative traits being seen as features, not bugs.
I understand that people actually like Trump on a personal level. Trump wasn’t a politician for most of his life. I understand that there are people who like Hillary on a personal level, and she’s been a political hack most of her life. The OP is baffled as to why anyone would like Trump. What is the OP missing? I’m suggesting that the OP might want to reconsider his current method(s) of gather data on Trump. Since there are people who like Trump as a human being, and the OP knows nothing about them, the OP needs to reconsider where he’s been getting his information.
So the “media” lies and portrays Trump as a narcisstic blowhard by somehow misusing videos of Trump himself. And then this same media portrayed Hillary Clinton as a competent political leader. But you were able to see through all this and see the “truth”.
Do your special insights involve a pair of sunglasses?
Several folks have said mostly the same thing, but you distilled it best. I want to amend your statement slightly. IMO it works like this: … he’s a top notch salesman and you can’t do that without *knowing how to pretend to be *likable.The key is giving that illusion. Some salesmen are genuinely likeable. Others merely are really good at faking it. That latter crew are the sociopaths who scam little old ladies who still say they love the guy after they’re broke and they know who did it.
Way too many people have a real hard time telling surface behavior from underlying reality. Professional TV packaging certainly makes that even tougher.
I think this must be another instance of “Our side does it, so your side must do it too.” For Hillary, not only have single sentences been taken out of context in their paragraph and repeated over and over on the FauxNews-Infowars blogs, but a single clause was taken out of context to reverse meaning completely, with the key word (“if”?) removed before the mindless repetition.
Trump on the other hand has been followed around by cameras almost 24/7. For the Access Hollywood tape, for example, there’s the 3-minute version and the 6-minute version. Which of those is the “snippet”?
And we watched long debates featuring Trump. In those, Trump often interrupted the other clowns with brief flatulences — are those the “snippets” you refer to?
I am certainly no Trump fan, but seriously?
The man is a real-estate salesman. That is all he has ever done, and he has made and lost billions doing it. No one can be successful in that field without being a likable, even charming individual in person. His entire career shows that one-on-one he is a likable person. Unfortunately, there are personality deficits and a strong aversion to the truth in the man as well. But one on one, his history proves he is a likable person.
And in an earlier thread about Clinton, in contrast to several reports about Clinton, Trump has made a positive impression with workers (security, police, etc) who have to be around him.
His public appearances are all part of his show. He is aggressive and combative because that is what worked to get him elected. The results show the wisdom of the approach. But let no one forget it was a show. He, like all salesman, is on stage any time he is in public and he is selling all the time. His public appearances are no indication of how he really is.
To me, that is one of the major reasons I dislike him. Because nothing he says or does in public can be trusted. He is acting all the time and one can’t draw conclusions about how he will do the job from his public stance. Nor can one trust anything he says. But a large portion of the voting public was OK with it. Now that the voters have signed on the dotted line, they will find out that Donald hasn’t signed anything. He made no promises that he will feel he has to keep, he doesn’t have any restrictions on his future actions. The whole country is his to “develop” and if it doesn’t work out, there is always someone else to blame.