There are lots of definitions of what charisma is - with the most mechanical and sterile being something like "a persona that for either specific or combinations of reasons is highly visible and hard to ignore and captures the attention or imagination of an audience "
And of course it can mean all manner of things - from smoldering sexuality and talent of a young Elvis or James Brown - to the unhinged and violent rhetorical mien of Hitler or Mussolini
Female charisma is just as prevalent but at a largely different encapsulated spectrum - yes sexy extremes like Marilyn Monroe or the more intellectual charm of Lauren Bacall - but also the force of personality from a Diane Feinstein or Roseanne Barr or the quirky ebullience of Michelle Thaller (girl, let me at your hair with some product). There ARE violently rhetorical dictator types but it's possible that gender roles reduce their avenues for success at least historically.
It doesn't require physical attractiveness at all - and there's an element that can be lost in the presentation or broadcast as a slew of Scott Eastwoods or Sam Worthingtons demonstrate - these examples are extremely handsome and in real life probably ferociously charismatic relative to a room full of randos.
I think my definition of it is a kind of aura of elements that a person emits in words and appearance that has a kind of brightness or volume and that it can be natural or deliberately projected -and amplified through content or performance. But it's also contextual - it can be turned off, or overshadowed by more charismatic company.
There's a video of a Trump legal deposition on one of his many bankruptcies or frauds where he ends up in a corner where he can't perform his act or tell the kinds of lies he always does and is forced into a legal strategy where he has to (still lying but sedated by the circumstances) simply plead ignorance to item after item. He looks beaten and pathetic and shitty because he's been cowed by, in this case the force of law, with no way out - but it shows that his charisma isn't permanent. It's built on the absurdity of his bullshit.
You can see him shrink and also see how intellectually stunted he is. He's only comprehending about 50% of the nuance and technical language :
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/09/30/donald_trump_deposition_video_live_blogged.html
There are two or three main types of reaction to Trump's bravado and vanity - the (libtard) recognition of what an outlandishly pathetic thing he is - a buffoon of such magnitude and such total failure at being a decent person -from trivia like his stupid haircut or his gross affection for his daughter - to the big stuff like the catastrophic harm he's doing on the world stage. But you can't look away. He's impossible to ignore.
The second type of reaction (and I'm not ignoring dolts who literally believe everything he says) is a recognition of the power of his cartoonish klaxon of absurdity - and the instinct that he can deliver for them the worst things he's offering - racism and tribalism mostly, but they will buy any product he is selling after a while. I think intellectually a lot of them understand what he really is - but as long as his continued existence and uncanny durability persist - that they will push that to the back of their mind - or even trick themselves into believing it.
The third and most morally repugnant reaction to his charisma is the GOP one - the recognition that this insanity can be an aegis for personal and party gain as long as they harness it by riding at the front of this train - and defending it lockstep to gain the most benefit. That's McConnell and the senate and some of the house. They've painted themselves into a corner by trying to ride it out - but this is a person who if he were a private citizen - they would NEVER admit him into their club. He's the height of gauche and ignorance but he's all they've got. But they'd not only admit he was charismatic - they'd likely define it the same way a liberal would.
Charisma is, as D&D suggests - a thing that can be used for good or evil - but it is not independent OF good or evil. Trump's charisma is defined and caused by the evil and stupidity that he enacts.
If Trump tried to focus his natural charisma on doing good, on being moral, on being charitable and kind and curious - I think he would fail very hard - but I also think that it would make him smaller and less charismatic - his behaviors in many ways can't even be applied to good at a fundamental level.
