Repeating Acton’s wise observation;”Good men are never great men.”
Trump may be many things, both good and bad, but most critically he is audacious; a prerequisite for leadership; and perceived by many as a transformational agent of change. Large swathes of voters have made it abundantly clear that they have seen enough effete types such as Doofus Willard and George the Compassionate; two of the most incompetent schmucks politics ever produced. Both had copious breeding, manners, schooling, etiquette etc. in their personality profiles and it all amounted to squat as both were and always will be perceived as feckless failures and losers. Voters have no further interest. Pass it on.
First, all the "good qualities" in the world are irrelevant if you can't get elected. And though you talk about how "many" perceive Trump positively, and "large swathes" have made clear their support, I don't think it is enough. "Many" people supported both McCain and Romney, and it wasn't enough. I also think "many" abhor Trump, and "large swathes" will never vote for him. I say that not based just on polling, but on conversations I've had with normally reliable Republican voters.
Second, the problems with Romney and Dubya were not that they were "effete". The primary problem with Dubya was that he was not sufficiently conservative. The primary problems with Romney were that he let up during the campaign due to bad advice, and had RomneyCare in his background. I would say that Trump actually probably shares equivalent flaws policy-wise.
But third, and perhaps more importantly, the derision you demonstrate toward manners, schooling, and etiquette is misplaced. Those were not the reason those candidates lost. In fact, you can be a bold, audacious leader and still display at least an average set of class and manners. You don't have to be a pompous snob, just don't be the guy who farts during Easter dinner and thinks it's funny.
Was Reagan effete because he had manners? Was he "unmanly" because he didn't talk about other candidate's wives, or the size of his penis, or because he didn't Barbara Walters for her looks? Strength, integrity, and executive ability are not logically linked to being rude.
I would agree that Trump has certain qualities of a good leader. Unfortunately, he loads them down with other lousy qualities that bear no relationship to leadership, but only serve to discredit him.master of the language. Churchill was many things, but common was not one of them. Actually, it's kind of funny that you talk about breeding given that Churchill's blood was about as blue as it gets.
I don't need a saint as President. But I don't want someone who too often acts the part of the fool either. I will likely overlook his personal foibles and vote for the guy in the general election anyway. But there are an awful lot of people who won't.