His appeal is his rejection of the status-quo. I get it. I thought the exit polling suggested that the economy and immigration were the big factors. I just have a hard time accepting that we have to put a person in charge that likely doesn't respect the democratic process in order to (supposedly) represent those who haven't been heard before.
My intention isn't to assassinate his character, but he was at one point facing non trivial legal charges, right? The conversation is just ridiculous because we're at a point where we have to talk about the validity of our judicial process?