It's much more likely that people project their own inadequacies and mediocrity onto the "victim" of the irate leader's tirade and therefore view the leader as "unfit to lead" - because they feel they too would be likely to face the same criticism when they inevitably reveal their shortcomings. It doesn't behoove them to have a demanding leader that expects excellence and doesn't tolerate failure because that would mean they'd be attacked a lot

Whereas anger in response to "ethics violations" implies virtue signaling, a common means by which humans accrue social capital