The difference between the Chauvin case the visual media depicts Chauvin as the aggressor and in this Rittenhouse is getting chased, clubbed and guns pulled on him. The emotional side of the story is more favorable to Rittenhouse. Sadly Chauvin's trial required the jury to pay attention to a lot of technical details which would determine guilt or innocence and Nelson fucked up by allowing the Jury to be heavily populated by women -- many of whom have gone on to state that they ignored all of the technical stuff in favor of emotion based evidence. Rittenhouse benefits greatly from the massive amount of visual evidence and also many people are willing to operate as expert witness for him. Chauvin had to deal with the inability of his defense team to get expert witness and the prosecution had expert witness commit wholesale perjury. Both the Cardiologist and the Police Chief committed perjury, the cardiologist said ridiculous things like the heart would suddenly pump better blood if your left anterior descending artery was 90% blocked and the Police Chief lied about the knee not being part of training. Rittenhouse on the other hand has the wider 2nd amendment community rallying around him and will gladly act as expert witness because there is a belief if Rittenhouse is convicted on these charges the entire idea of self defense is defunct because his case is such a text book example of a self defense case.
Mind you, this doesn't discount incompetency on the defense lawyer's part. They can easily botch this fucking case.