“How on earth,” people wonder, “can somebody as obnoxious and boastful and arrogant be so popular, at least with Republican voters?”
No, we’re not talking George Pataki here.
The one and only reason that someone as coarse and contemptible as Donald Trump could lead the early Republican presidential sweepstakes is that he is willing to confront his adversaries; to take on his critics, as his many Mexican amigos might phrase it, “mano a mano.”
The fact that Trump agrees to face off with his enemies at MSNBC, lash out at Univision and Macy’s when they drop his products and denounce John McCain after McCain bad mouths him is as endearing as it is unique – at least to certain millions of Americans who actually may believe that the Donald could become President. (Don’t worry, he can’t!)
Part of Trump's popularity stems from the growing backlash to “political correctness “in society. As Jerry Seinfeld has pointed out with respect to college students and Bill Maher with respect to liberals, many people today are just too doggone sensitive to even a mildly discouraging word about almost anything.
The fact that the Trumpster doesn’t seem to care how many Latinos or women or war heroes he offends is seen by a growing number as, well, “refreshing.”
Trump’s rise in the polls is also emblematic of a growing tactic in effective PR to confront those who oppose you by calling them out and challenging them on their arguments.
Rarely in the past would politicians or entertainers or business leaders come back at an opponent with a direct attack on them and their arguments. Rather, the accepted approach has always been more diplomatic, to “talk around” an issue, without directly going after the opposition.
Today, by contrast, we see a growing number of opinion leaders -- think Chase CEO Jamie Dimon wondering aloud if self-righteous financial critic Sen. Elizabeth Warren “fully understands the global banking system” -- willing to “bring it on.”
Two recent examples underscore the point.
• President Obama’s White House press conference about the Iran agreement exhibited an in-control but defiant chief executive, daring his adversaries to do better.
Even after an hour’s worth of questions had been asked and mostly answered, Obama wasn’t through. “Was that it?” he wondered. And he kept right on going, "I made some notes about many of the arguments — the other arguments that I've heard here."
Reporters, of course, being reporters groused that it wasn’t fair that Obama had hijacked their chance to ask questions. Tut, tut. What actually happened was that the President, himself, cited the negatives raised about his plan and showed his willingness to “bring ‘em on.”
• The other example came from a most unlikely source, Caitlyn Jenner.
The former Olympian-turned-female could easily have ignored the controversy swirling around her selection as recipient of the Arthur Ashe Award for Courage by ratings-craved ESPN. But she didn’t; instead choosing to duke it out directly with her critics.
Said Jenner her memorable acceptance speech, “If you want to call me names, make jokes, doubt my intentions, go ahead, because the reality is, I can take it. But for the thousands of kids out there coming to terms with being true to who they are, they shouldn’t have to take it.”
Or, stated another way, “Bring it on.”
Fraser P. Seitel has been a communications consultant, author and teacher for 40 years. He may be reached directly at [email protected].
The ridiculously high prices Americans are paying at the supermarket might influence how—or if—they vote in November.
At a moment in history when there are so many conflicts among peoples here and abroad, let us put our differences aside and celebrate this wonderful season in a spirit of togetherness.
The news announcing the death of Henry Kissinger, the last of the prevaricating politicians and so-called statesmen who stole my future and that of thousands of other young Americans, got me thinking about Walter Cronkite.
Have a comment? Send it to 
No comments have been submitted for this story yet.