Consequentialists are distrusted because they deliberately choose to disregard social group weighting and circles of loyalty in their moral decisions.

That's not to say that all consequentialist actions are disliked; only those that come at significant cost to your group (of any size - even 2).

The article says that people like a consequentialist political leader, but that's not entirely correct. They like a political leader who is consequentialist for entirely "in-group" decisions. The moment he prioritizes outside peoples welfare at a high cost to his own, no matter how much objective "good" it brings, he'll soon find himself out of office. A leader who is too deontologist with his in-group decisions will be seen as corrupt for helping out his cronies.

In fact, this whole "consequentialist vs deontologist" kind of misses the point. Deontologists ARE consequentialists for entirely in-group decisions, and that's how social creatures like it, and how evolution would have shaped social animals.

Trump's appeal comes in a large part due to his motto: "America First", even if it's at the cost of everything else.