Eight months prior to the election, MacWilliams (2016) relied on his survey finding - that high authoritarians were strongly in favor of Trump - to predict correctly that routine election surveys were sharply underestimating Trump’s support. During the presidential primaries in February 2016, Feldman (in press) also found a significant positive relationship between authoritarianism and favorable evaluations of Trump among Republicans. Indeed, none of the evaluations of the other primary candidates revealed such a connection.
Unlike you, I read the Politico article it's referencing with the Macwilliams study. The only two criteria it references as "authoritarian" are wanting to enforce immigration law as it's written and stricter muslim refugee intake. And whaddya know, all those people support Trump! Fuckin authoritarians, am I right?
I bet if there were a question like "is it acceptable to assault someone who hurts your feelings" then magically all the authoritarians would have been on Clinton's side.
Try actually understanding the definition and context of "authoritarian" as used in the study, and also don't force this partisan nonsense where it doesn't belong.
You read a few lines at most and formed an opinion without actually informing yourself. This is a perfect example of willful ignorance. This is the kind of thing """fake news""" thrives on. ---