As populist radical right parties muster increasing support in many democracies, an important question is how mainstream parties can recapture their voters. Focusing on Germany, we present original panel evidence that voters supporting the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)—the country’s largest populist radical right party—resemble partisan loyalists with entrenched anti-establishment views, seemingly beyond recapture by mainstream parties. Yet this loyalty does not only reflect anti-establishment voting, but also gridlocked party-issue positioning. Despite descriptive evidence of strong party loyalty, experimental evidence reveals that many AfD voters change allegiances when mainstream parties accommodate their preferences. However, for most parties this repositioning is extremely costly. While mainstream parties can attract populist radical right voters via restrictive immigration policies, they alienate their own voters in doing so. Examining position shifts across issue dimensions, parties, and voter groups, our research demonstrates that, absent significant changes in issue preferences or salience, the status quo is an equilibrium.
Abou-ChadiT.KrauseW. (2020). The causal effect of radical right success on mainstream parties’ policy positions: A regression discontinuity approach. British Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 829–847.
2.
AbramsonS. F.KoçakK.MagazinnikA. (2019). What do we learn about voter preferences from conjoint experiments?Paper presented at the 2019 conference of the Society for Political Methodology. https://polmeth.mit.edu/program
3.
AdamsJ.EzrowL.Somer-TopcuZ. (2011). Is anybody listening? Evidence that voters do not respond to European parties’ policy statements during elections. American Journal of Political Science, 55(2), 370–382.
4.
AkkermanA.MuddeC.ZasloveA. (2014). How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters. Comparative Political Studies, 47(9), 1324–1353.
ArtD. (2011). Inside the radical right: The development of anti-immigrant parties in Western Europe. Cambridge University Press.
7.
ArzheimerK. (2009). Contextual factors and the extreme right vote in Western Europe, 1980–2002. American Journal of Political Science, 53(2), 259–275.
8.
ArzheimerK. (2013). Working-class parties 2.0? Competition between centre left and extreme right parties. In RydgrenJ. (Ed.), Class politics and the radical right (pp. 75–90). Routledge.
9.
BaleT. (2008). Turning round the telescope. Centre-right parties and immigration and integration policy in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(3), 315–330.
BermanS. (2019). Populism is a symptom rather than a cause: Democratic disconnect, the decline of the center-left, and the rise of populism in Western Europe. Polity, 51(4), 654–667.
12.
BlinderS.FordR.IvarsflatenE. (2013). The better angels of our nature: How the antiprejudice norm affects policy and party preferences in Great Britain and Germany. American Journal of Political Science, 57(4), 841–857.
13.
BornschierS. (2010). Cleavage politics and the populist right. Temple University Press.
14.
BornschierS. (2018). Globalization, cleavages, and the radical right. In RydgrenJ. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the radical right. Oxford University Press.
15.
BustikovaL. (2014). Revenge of the radical right. Comparative Political Studies, 47(12), 1738–1765.
16.
CarterE. (2013). The extreme right in Western Europe: Success or failure?Manchester University Press.
17.
ChouW.DancygierR.EgamiN.JamalA. (2021). Replication data for: Competing for loyalists? How party positioning affects populist radical right voting. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/BQDMAD
18.
CofféH. (2018). Gender and the radical right. In RydgrenJ. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the radical right (pp. 200–211). Oxford University Press.
19.
CohenD. (2018). When supply meets demand: Context-dependent mechanisms of radical right voting (PhD thesis). Humboldt University.
20.
DaltonR. J.McAllisterI. (2015). Random walk or planned excursion? Continuity and change in the left–right positions of political parties. Comparative Political Studies, 48(6), 759–787.
21.
DancygierR. (2010). Immigration and conflict in Europe. Cambridge University Press.
22.
DancygierR. (2020). Another progressives’ dilemma: Immigration, the radical right & threats to gender equality. Dædalus, 149(1), 56–71.
23.
DancygierR.MargalitY. (2020). The evolution of the immigration debate: Evidence from a new dataset of party positions over the last half-century. Comparative Political Studies, 53(5), 734–774.
24.
DassonnevilleR. (2018). Electoral volatility and parties’ ideological responsiveness. European Journal of Political Research, 57(4), 808–828.
25.
de la CuestaB.EgamiN.ImaiK. (2020). Improving the external validity of conjoint analysis: The essential role of profile distribution. Political Analysis. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2020.40
26.
de VriesC. E.HoboltS. (2020). Political entrepreneurs: The rise of challenger parties in Europe. Princeton University Press.
27.
FerlandB.DassonnevilleR. (2019). Shifting parties, rational switchers: Are voters responding to ideological shifts by political parties?Party Politics, 27(1), 114–124.
28.
Fernandez-VazquezP. (2020). Voter discounting of party campaign manifestos: An analysis of mainstream and niche parties in Western Europe, 1971–2011. Party Politics, 26(4), 471–483.
29.
FitzgeraldJ.CurtisK. A.CorlissC. L. (2012). Anxious publics: Worries about crime and immigration. Comparative Political Studies, 45(4), 477–506.
30.
FoaR. S.MounkY. (2017). The signs of deconsolidation. Journal of Democracy, 28(1), 5–15.
31.
GidronN.HallP. A. (2017). The politics of social status: Economic and cultural roots of the populist right. The British Journal of Sociology, 68(S1), S57–S84.
32.
GivensT. E. (2005). Voting radical right in Western Europe. Cambridge University Press.
33.
GolderM. (2016). Far right parties in Europe. Annual Review of Political Science, 19, 477–497.
34.
HagerA.VeitS. (2019). Attitudes toward asylum seekers: Evidence from Germany. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(2), 412–422.
35.
HainmuellerJ.HopkinsD. J.YamamotoT. (2014). Causal inference in conjoint analysis: Understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Political Analysis, 22(1), 1–30.
36.
HalikiopoulouD.NanouK.VasilopoulouS. (2012). The paradox of nationalism: The common denominator of radical right and radical left Euroscepticism. European Journal of Political Research, 51(4), 504–539.
37.
HarteveldE. (2016). Winning the losers but losing the winners? The electoral consequences of the radical right moving to the economic left. Electoral Studies, 44, 225–234.
38.
HaselbergerS.MonathH. (2018). Auch die SPD ist gespalten bei der Flüchtlingspolitik. Der Tagesspiegel, June 28.
39.
HäusermannS.KriesiH. (2015). What do voters want? Dimensions and configurations in individual-level preferences and party choice. In BeramendiP.HäusermannS.KitscheltH.KriesiH. (Eds.), The politics of advanced capitalism (pp. 202–230). Cambridge University Press.
40.
HoboltS. B.TilleyJ. (2016). Fleeing the centre: The rise of challenger parties in the aftermath of the euro crisis. West European Politics, 39(5), 971–991.
41.
HoogheL.MarksG. (2018). Cleavage theory meets Europe’s crises: Lipset, Rokkan, and the transnational cleavage. Journal of European Public Policy, 25(1), 109–135.
42.
HooijerG. (Forthcoming). ‘They take our houses’: Benefit competition and the erosion of support for immigrants’ social rights. British Journal of Political Science.
43.
IvarsflatenE. (2008). What unites right-wing populists in Western Europe? Re-examining grievance mobilization models in seven successful cases. Comparative Political Studies, 41(1), 3–23.
44.
KitscheltH. (2007). Growth and persistence of the radical right in postindustrial democracies: Advances and challenges in comparative research. West European Politics, 30(5), 1176–1206.
45.
KitscheltH. (2018). Party systems and radical right-wing parties. In RydgrenJ. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the radical right (pp. 166–199). Oxford University Press.
46.
KrauseW.WagnerA. (2019). Becoming part of the gang? Established and nonestablished populist parties and the role of external efficacy. Party Politics, 27(1), 161–173.
47.
LancasterC. M. (2020). Not so radical after all: Ideological diversity among radical right supporters and its implications. Political Studies, 68(3), 600–616.
48.
LeeperT. J.HoboltS. B.TilleyJ. (2020). Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments. Political Analysis, 28(2), 207–221.
49.
LefkofridiZ.WagnerM.WillmannJ. E. (2014). Left-authoritarians and policy representation in Western Europe: Electoral choice across ideological dimensions. West European Politics, 37(1), 65–90.
50.
LenzG. S. (2013). Follow the leader?: How voters respond to politicians’ policies and performance. University of Chicago Press.
51.
LubbersM.GijsbertsM.ScheepersP. (2002). Extreme right-wing voting in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 41(3), 345–378.
52.
MaderM.SchoenH. (2019). The European refugee crisis, party competition, and voters’ responses in Germany. West European Politics, 42(1), 67–90.
53.
MarksG.AttewellD.RovnyJ.HoogheL. (2020). The changing political landscape in Europe. In CottaM.IserniaP. (Eds.), The EU through multiple crises (pp. 20–44). Routledge.
54.
MayerN. (2002). Ces français qui votent Le Pen. Flammarion-Pere Castor.
55.
MayerN. (2013). From Jean-Marie to Marine Le Pen: Electoral change on the far right. Parliamentary Affairs, 66(1), 160–178.
56.
MeguidB. M. (2008). Party competition between unequals: Strategies and electoral fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge University Press.
57.
MuddeC. (2010). The populist radical right: A pathological normalcy. West European Politics, 33(6), 1167–1186.
58.
NeunerF. G.WratilC. (2020). The populist marketplace: Unpacking the role of “thin” and “thick” ideology. Political Behavior. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09629-y
59.
OltermannP. (2018). Germany’s left and right vie to turn politics upside down. The Guardian, July 22.
60.
Pardos-PradoS. (2015). How can mainstream parties prevent niche party success? Center-right parties and the immigration issue. The Journal of Politics, 77(2), 352–367.
61.
RooduijnM. (2018). What unites the voter bases of populist parties? Comparing the electorates of 15 populist parties. European Political Science Review, 10(3), 351–368.
62.
RooduijnM.van der BrugW.de LangeS. L. (2016). Expressing or fuelling discontent? The relationship between populist voting and political discontent. Electoral Studies, 43, 32–40.
63.
RydgrenJ. (2008). Immigration sceptics, xenophobes or racists? Radical right-wing voting in six West European countries. European Journal of Political Research, 47(6), 737–765.
64.
SpoonJ.-J.KlüverH. (2020). Responding to far right challengers: Does accommodation pay off?Journal of European Public Policy, 27(2), 273–291.
65.
StaasC. (2020). Das Ende der Selbstgewissheit. Die Zeit, April 29.
66.
SteinerN. D.LandwehrC. (2018). Populistische Demokratiekonzeptionen und die Wahl der AfD: Evidenz aus einer Panelstudie. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 59(3), 463–491.
67.
TavitsM. (2007). Principle vs. pragmatism: Policy shifts and political competition. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 151–165.
68.
van der BrugW.FennemaM.TillieJ. (2000). Anti-immigrant parties in Europe: Ideological or protest vote?European Journal of Political Research, 37(1), 77–102.
69.
Van HauwaertS. M.Van KesselS. (2018). Beyond protest and discontent: A cross-national analysis of the effect of populist attitudes and issue positions on populist party support. European Journal of Political Research, 57(1), 68–92.
70.
VasilopoulouS. (2018). The radical right and Euroskepticism. In RydgrenJ. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the radical right (pp. 122–140). Oxford University Press.
71.
VoogdR.DassonnevilleR. (2020). Are the supporters of populist parties loyal voters? Dissatisfaction and stable voting for populist parties. Government & Opposition, 55(3), 349–370.
72.
ZittelT.NyhuisD. (2018). Two faces of party unity: Roll-call behavior and vote explanations in the German Bundestag. Parliamentary Affairs, 72(2), 406–424.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
