This is a comment I posted in response to Charles Blow's 9/8 column that the press's failure to hold Trump accountable for his repeated lies explains why a 15% majority in a recent poll found Trump more honest than Clinton:
It truly is mysterious, how any sane person could vote for an obvious psychopath like Trump. Of course the media deserves much blame, but what about our fellow citizens? At the moment, to be sure, we just have polls, and people can tell pollsters anything they want. Still, an extraordinarily large number of Americans is obviously considering a vote for this creature. As to Trump's lead in believability, I think that comes down to optics, and the possibility that many people disregard the content of what is said in favor of the person's demeanor. Trump, an accomplished huckster, in presenting a spontaneous self, peppered with "trust me" and "believe me" comments, comes across as credibly as any TV evangelist or con man must if they are to make a living at fooling people. (See the NPR interview with Jerry Springer making this point on 9/30/16, http://www.wnyc.org/story/jerry-springer-knows-about-mixing-politics-entertainment/?utm_source=Newsletter%3A+WNYC+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=0a0e12244d-Daily_Brief_July_4_20141_26_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_edd6b58c0d-0a0e12244d-68710341&mc_cid=0a0e12244d&mc_eid=5e42d777cb) By contrast, Clinton is obviously careful, lawyerly, and defensive of her privacy; she couldn't persuade an eskimo to buy a heater with this manner.