Rise of the <i>Trumpenvolk</i>

TLDR

Despite the wide application of the label “populist” in the 2016 election cycle, there has been little systematic evidence that this election is distinctive in its populist appeal. Content analysis of campaign speeches shows that Trump, more so than any other candidate, employs a rhetoric that is distinctive in its simplicity, anti‑elitism, and collectivism. Our analysis of historical trends, rhetoric, public opinion, and survey data shows that populism aptly describes the 2016 election, that Donald Trump exemplifies populist par excellence, that a large representation gap accompanies populist candidates, and that his supporters uniquely combine anti‑expertise, anti‑elitism, and pronationalist sentiments, underscoring populism as a distinct mechanism of political mobilization.

Abstract

Despite the wide application of the label “populist” in the 2016 election cycle, there has been little systematic evidence that this election is distinctive in its populist appeal. Looking at historical trends, contemporary rhetoric, and public opinion data, we find that populism is an appropriate descriptor of the 2016 election and that Donald Trump stands out in particular as the populist par excellence. Historical data reveal a large “representation gap” that typically accompanies populist candidates. Content analysis of campaign speeches shows that Trump, more so than any other candidate, employs a rhetoric that is distinctive in its simplicity, anti-elitism, and collectivism. Original survey data show that Trump’s supporters are distinctive in their unique combination of anti-expertise, anti-elitism, and pronationalist sentiments. Together, these findings highlight the distinctiveness of populism as a mechanism of political mobilization and the unusual character of the 2016 race.