Thank you for providing one of the rationales for why someone would possibly listen to this person. I wholeheartedly disagree, but I appreciate the thoughts.
To quickly address a few things: one argument is more or less “even a broken clock is right twice a day” — which, sure, but that certainly doesn’t excuse his baseless attacks on people such as the Sandy Hook victims, to use just one, high profile example. To compare him/this to the Enlightenment seems folly at best — but only history will prove that definitively, of course. What evidence is there that he is highly educated? Certainly his formal education track record isn’t there. So is it just the fact that he can talk endlessly about something with command? That’s the oldest trick in the book to convey knowledge without actually having much of any.
Lastly, my point actually isn’t that he’s just “exploting dumbness” — that was on purpose, right? 😉 There’s undoubtedly some of that here, but because I believe that he himself isn’t right in the head, my guess is that he’s not quite as corrupt as others in such a position would be or are — and I think that further endears him to his audience. They believe he believes what he’s saying. Because I think he does often times! That’s what’s truly disturbing here.