I've had a series of CEOs who've said unnecessary, polarising things. The kind of thing that 10-50% of the employees would really object to - examples like your

I've had a series of CEOs who've said unnecessary, polarising things. The kind of thing that 10-50% of the employees would really object to - examples like yours or politics. It seems like an uncharacteristic risk with negligible payoff (he's a real person just like me!) but considerable downsides (he thinks my vote was stupid) that I don't see from middle management. Maybe it's survivorship bias? The kind of people who manage to become CEOs are the ones who have strong opinions but haven't suffered backlash for them. If they had experienced half their orgchart hating them, they wouldn't have made the cut?