On Jan. 23, New Hampshire could determine the future direction of our country. On that day, Republican and undeclared voters will have the chance to choose an aspiring authoritarian strongman who promises to solve complicated problems rapidly and singlehandedly, or a candidate who will stay the course with our slow, consensus building democracy that requires compromise.

Over the past several weeks, former President Donald Trump, the aspiring autocrat, has described the actions he would take were he elected president next November. At rallies he’s pledged to rid the nation of illegal immigrants who are “poisoning the blood of our nation,” free the “hostages” who participated in the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol, go after the corrupt “Biden Family,” shoot shoplifters, institute the death penalty for drug traffickers and “root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country, that lie and steal and cheat on elections.” He’s also promised that If voters elect him he’ll “come down hard” on media outlets that disagree with him, repeal Obamacare, and gut Federal employment guidelines so he can install loyalists into all government agencies — including the Department of Justice and the FBI.

Reading the countless editorials expressing concern over the former president’s 2024 campaign promises called to mind an observation conservative journalist Salena Zito offered about Trump in a September 2016 article in The Atlantic: “The press takes him literally, but not seriously while his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.”

It is evident Donald Trump’s supporters didn’t take his 2016 campaign promises literally, His supporters remain steadfast even though he didn’t lock-up Hillary Clinton, didn’t come close to building the “big, beautiful wall” along the southern border and didn’t collect a dime from Mexico to pay for the 400 miles of the wall he did build that ultimately cost each US taxpayer $70. Nor did he “drain the swamp” or replace the Affordable Care Act with something better. Instead, the full-time Federal workforce grew by an average of 0.9% per year during his administration.” Nor did the many “Infrastructure Weeks” he announced during his term of office materialize.

A handful of his rabid supporters took him literally when he recommended using bleach or disinfectants to cure COVID, and only his hardest-core followers took him literally when he asked them to march on the Capitol “to stop the steal” on Jan. 6, 2021. Fortunately, none of his followers took him literally when he signaled a positive view of hanging the vice president, Mike Pence.

I doubt that his supporters are taking the pledges he is making now literally, but they do continue to take him seriously because his promises reflect their sentiments and resonate at an emotional level. When he says: “For those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution,” or when he claims he is being indicted “For you…” the “200 million people who love our country” his followers feel heard and supported.

Trump’s bleak assessment of our country also resonates with his core supporters. His gloomy exaggerations about the state of the economy, the rampant crime in urban areas, President Biden’s age, and the Biden administration’s efforts in Ukraine and Gaza all reflect the thinking of his followers. To make matters worse, Trump’s exaggerations and inaccuracies are amplified by the media outlets his supporters rely on. Fox News, Breitbart, Newsmax, toxic podcasters and talk radio personalities and conspiracy-mongering YouTube personalities act as echo chambers for the claims and promises Trump makes, and they are rewarded for echoing his message with a loyal audience of viewers and listeners and the advertising revenue that results.

Those of us who failed to take Trump seriously in his previous elections wonder why his supporters overlook the seriousness of the charges pending against him. In a recent column, Boston Globe writer Scot Leigh, who is also bewildered by the sustained faith of Trump’s supporters, offers their “affinity for authoritarianism” as an explanation. He buttresses this assertion with research by political scientist Karen Stenner, research that estimated roughly one-third of the population has authoritarian tendencies to some degree. He also cites the findings of a poll completed by Matthew MacWilliams, author of “On Fascism: 12 Lessons from American History” which found that “the best single predictor of support for Trump wasn’t a voter’s race or income or education level, but whether he or she had strong authoritarian tendencies.”

The latent authoritarian tendencies of the electorate explain the source of Trump’s support and why his followers overlook the 91 charges against him. Trump says the charges are politically motivated so it must be true. Trump says there must have been some irregularities in the 2020 election and because he says so it must be true. And they believe Trump when he tells his followers that if he is convicted of any of these charges, they could be next.

Because the Republican party supports Trump’s candidacy despite his lies, his myriad legal issues, his insistence on absolute fealty, and his promise to rule as an autocrat, the press is now taking Trump literally and seriously. They fear that Trump’s highly energized authoritarian core of voters will stand by him in the primaries and, if he is elected, they will fully support his efforts to exert as much control as possible. Their fears are based on historic precedents and the rise of illiberal authoritarians who have gained a foothold across the globe through such elections. The press senses that voters may choose an autocrat because they are frustrated with liberal democracy: its slow pace of change, championing of multi-culturalism, regulatory red tape, and demands for sacrifice in the name of climate change and economic equality.

New Hampshire voters can wield their influence next month. We can support a budding authoritarian who admires the leadership of Vladimir Putin and Hungary’s illiberal strongman Viktor Orban or we can choose a candidate who wants to sustain our slow, multi-cultural, and consensus building democracy. I believe the right choice is self-evident.

Wayne Gersen lives in Etna.