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.
AkkermanAgnesMuddeCasZasloveAndrej. 2014. How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative Political Studies47 (9): 1324–53.
2.
AlbertazziDanieleMcDonnellDuncan. 2008. Introduction: The sceptre and the spectre. In Twenty-first century populism: The spectre of Western European democracy, eds. AlbertazziDanieleMcDonnellDuncan, 1–11. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
ArditiBenjamin. 2005. Populism as an internal periphery of democratic politics. In Populism and the mirror of democracy, ed. PanizzaFranciso, 72–117. New York, NY: Verso.
4.
BakkerBert N.RooduijnMatthijsSchumacherGijs. 2016. The psychological roots of populist voting: Evidence from the United States, the Netherlands and Germany. European Journal of Political Research55 (2): 302–20.
5.
BartelsLarry M.2016. Failure to converge: Presidential candidates, core partisans, and the missing middle in American electoral politics. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (this volume).
6.
BonikowskiBartGidronNoam. 2016. The populist style in American politics: Presidential campaign discourse, 1952–1996. Social Forces94 (4): 1593–621.
7.
BrooksDavid. 26February2016. The governing cancer of our time. New York Times.
8.
BuricFedja. 3March2016. Trump’s not Hilter, he’s Mussolini. Salon.
9.
CanovanM.1999. Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy. Political Studies47 (1): 2–16.
10.
ElchardusMarkSpruytBram. 2016. Populism, persistent Republicanism and declinism: An empirical analysis of populism as a thin ideology. Government and Opposition51 (1): 111–33.
11.
FensterMark. 2008. Conspiracy theories: Secrecy and power in American culture. Rev. and updated ed. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
12.
FrumDavid.Jan/Feb2016. The great Republican revolt. The Atlantic. Available from http://www.theatlantic.com.
13.
GerteisJosephGoolsbyAlyssa. 2005. Nationalism in America: The case of the populist movement. Theory and Society34 (2): 197–225.
14.
GoodwynLawrence. 1978. The populist moment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15.
HartRoderick P.2000. Campaign talk. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
HartRoderick P.CarrollCraig. 2013. Diction 7: The text analysis program. Austin, TX: Digitext Inc.
17.
HartRoderick P.ChildersJay P.LindColene J.2013. Political tone: How leaders talk and why. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
18.
HartRoderick P.JarvisSharon E.JenningsWilliam P.Smith-HowellDeborah. 2005. Political keywords: Using language that uses us. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19.
HawkinsK. A.2009. Is Chavez populist? Measuring populist discourse in comparative perspective. Comparative Political Studies42 (8): 1040–67.
20.
HawkinsKirkRovira KaltwasswerCristóbal. 2014. The populist specter in contemporary Chile. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Latin American Studies Association.
21.
HawkinsKirkRidingScottMuddeCas. 2012. Measuring populist attitudes. Political Concepts: Committee on Concepts and Methods, Working Paper Series, Number 55.
22.
HoellerSusie. 9November2008. A demagogue in a suit. The Huffington Post.
23.
HofstadterRichard. 1955. The age of reform. New York, NY: Knopf.
24.
JansenRobert S.2011. Populist mobilization: A new theoretical approach to populism. Sociological Theory29 (2): 75–96.
25.
JagersJanWalgraveStefaan. 2007. Populism as political communication style: An empirical study of political parties’ discourse in Belgium. European Journal of Political Research46 (3): 319–45.
26.
KazinMichael. 1995. The populist persuasion. New York, NY: Basic Books.
27.
LeeMichael J.2006. The populist chameleon: The people’s party, Huey Long, George Wallace, and the populist argumentative frame. Quarterly Journal of Speech92 (4): 355–78.
28.
McCallLeslie. 2013. The undeserving rich: American beliefs about inequality, opportunity, and redistribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
McNallScott G.1988. The road to rebellion: Class formation and Kansas populism, 1865–1900. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
30.
MilbankDana. 7March2016. Trump’s flirtation with fascism. Washington Post.
31.
MoffittBenjamin. 2015. How to perform crisis: A model for understanding the key role of crisis in contemporary populism. Government and Opposition50 (2): 189–217. doi:10.1017/gov.2014.13.
32.
MoffittBenjaminTormeySimon. 2014. Rethinking populism: Politics, mediatisation and political style: Rethinking populism. Political Studies62 (2): 381–97. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12032.
33.
MuddeCas. 2004. The populist zeitgeist. Government and Opposition39 (4): 542–63.
34.
MuddeCasRovira KaltwasserCristóbal. 2012. Populism and (liberal) democracy: A framework for analysis. In Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or corrective for democracy? eds. MuddeCasRovira KaltwasserCristóbal, 1–26. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35.
MuddeCasRovira KaltwasserCristóbal. 2013. Exclusionary vs. inclusionary populism: Comparing contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition48 (2): 147–74.
36.
OliverJ. EricWoodThomas J.2014. Conspiracy theories and the paranoid style(s) of mass opinion. American Journal of Political Science58 (4): 952–66.
37.
OstlerJeffrey. 1995. The rhetoric of conspiracy and the formation of Kansas populism. Agricultural History61 (1): 1–27.
38.
PanizzaFrancisco. 2005. Populism and the mirror of democracy. In Populism and the mirror of democracy, ed. PanizzaFrancisco, 1–31. New York, NY: Verso.
39.
PappasTakis. S. 2012. Populism emergent: A framework for analyzing its contexts, mechanics, and causes. EUI Working Papers RSCAS 2012/01. European University Institute, Florence Italy.
40.
PostelCharles. 2007. The populist vision. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41.
RooduijnMatthijs. 2014a. The mesmerising message: The diffusion of populism in public debates in Western European media. Political Studies62 (4): 726–44.
42.
RooduijnMatthijs. 2014b. The nucleus of populism: In search of the lowest common denominator. Government and Opposition49 (4): 573–99. doi:10.1017/gov.2013.30.
43.
RooduijnMatthijsPauwelsTeun. 2011. Measuring populism: Comparing two methods of content analysis. West European Politics34 (6): 1272–83.
44.
Rovira KaltwasserCristóbal. 2014. Latin American populism: Some conceptual and normative lessons. Constellations21 (4): 494–504.
45.
SchaefferFrank. 6October2008. Sarah Palin: America’s lipstick fascist. The Huffington Post.
46.
SidesJohnTeslerMichaelVavreckLynn. 2016. The electoral landscape of 2016. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (this volume).
47.
SpruytB.KeppensG.Van DroogenbroeckF.2016. Who supports populism and what attracts people to it?Political Research Quarterly69 (2): 335–46.
48.
StanleyBen. 2008. The thin ideology of populism. Journal of Political Ideologies13 (1): 95–110.
49.
StanleyBen. 2011. Populism, nationalism, or national populism? An analysis of Slovak voting behaviour at the 2010 parliamentary election. Communist and Post-Communist Studies44 (4): 257–70.
50.
TaggartPaul A.2000. Populism. Concepts in the Social Sciences. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
51.
ViserMatt. 20October2015. For presidential hopefuls, simpler language resonates. Boston Globe.
52.
ZhongWeifeng. 2016. The candidates in their own words: A textual analysis of 2016 presidential debates. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute. Available from www.aei.org.
