Kollberg, Markus Florian; (2023) Populist Rhetoric in Party Competition and its Effects on Voters. Doctoral thesis (Ph.D), UCL (University College London).

Preview

Text Kollberg_Thesis_Submission.pdf - Accepted Version Download (7MB) | Preview

Abstract

How do political parties use populist rhetoric – presenting arguments in people-centric, anti-elite and “good vs. evil” frames – in democratic competition? And, to what extent does populist rhetoric explain populist parties’ and candidates’ success? In three papers, this thesis investigates when and how politicians engage in populist rhetoric, whether populist arguments have different effects on voters than non-populist arguments, and if mainstream parties benefit from talking populist themselves. In the first paper, I analyse parliamentary debates from the European Parliament to understand how challenger party politicians leverage anti-establishment rhetoric and issue-entrepreneurship. I argue that parliamentarians’ incentives when giving a speech systematically vary depending on whether they represent challenger or dominant parties: While dominant parties must balance policy-, office-, and vote-seeking, challengers prioritise electoral success. They thus engage in anti-establishment rhetoric and issue-entrepreneurship conditional on anticipated electoral returns, i.e. when speeches are likely to be transmitted to voters. The second paper tests the widely-held notion that populist rhetoric is particularly successful in winning and binding voters by conducting a survey experiment in the UK. I find that, on average, populist arguments have a negative effect on the electoral viability of candidates and no effect on voters’ issue preferences. However, when politicians speak to voters who already like them, populist arguments do sway these voters’ issue preferences. Among voters with strong populist attitudes, populist arguments also do not dampen politicians’ electoral viability. Using a survey experiment in Germany, the third paper tests whether mainstream parties can win back voters from radical right challengers by engaging in populist rhetoric or by combining populist rhetoric and radical policy positions. It finds no evidence that populist rhetoric is a promising strategy for mainstream parties. Taken together, this thesis adds important nuance to the debate about populist rhetoric: It is neither omnipresent in political discourse, nor is it a particularly powerful rhetorical strategy. Instead, its presence and effects are highly conditional.

Download activity - last month

Export as XMLJSONCSV

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as JSONCSVXML

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as XMLJSONCSV

Archive Staff Only

View Item