I'm getting my information on the number of people who dislike him from the reactions of other drivers, team members and the press - the British press are sycophantic as anything, while everyone else treats him with a degree of contempt. Yes, the Brazilian GP is always going to be a partisan crowd, but not many championship winners are actively boo-ed when they climb out of their car (and can't get the wheel back on. Whoops!)
All serious competitors, the same as the best fighter pilots to give a comparable example, have to have a degree of arrogance. If you're a nice, polite "Au, ai sai, arfter you, auld chap!" type, you're not going to win races. I also believe that part of Hamilton's arrogance is justified - he really is better than many of the drivers in that field (including Raikonnen, but not I believe Massa and Alonso. He's probably on a relatively equal level to them). These guys are used to being around egos, so if so many people dislike him, there's even more ego than normal involved here. Alonso is a firebrand - he reacts very badly to anyone who questions him. Some like that temprement, some don't. I've seen it cost him races, which is why I think it's something he needs to control.
On the other hand, I really don't believe that just the person with the greatest number of victories should win a championship. If you win six races out of twelve and don't finish the other six, but someone else finishes every race in a good position, then that driver and that driver's team deserve to win just as much if not more than someone who is inconsistent, but shows flashes of brilliance. According to that rule, why don't we just do the result off the qualifying positions? The best driver and car are obviously those who qualify in pole position, so why bother with the race at all? (Only a little bit of devil's advocate there... Honest! :d)
