Why Populism Is So Effective in US Politics

In the modern political landscape, Donald Trump’s 2016 election victory brought significant uncertainty – not just in the US, but also across Europe. The 2024 presidential election has reignited concerns among European leaders, who fear that a second Trump presidency could destabilize Europe’s security and economic alliances, as well as the liberal international order. 

Trump's foreign policy diverged from traditional US commitments to Europe, raising alarm when he showed an affinity for authoritarian leaders like Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump's protectionist trade policies, such as imposing tariffs on European steel and aluminum, further strained transatlantic economic cooperation. 

With an “America First” approach, Trump prioritized US interests over long-established ties, a trend that could continue under another presidency, weakening both US and European economic bonds. 

Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement also undermined Europe’s climate leadership, challenging its ambitious agenda to combat global warming. Without US support, European nations may find it harder to lead on climate issues, especially if Trump returns to office.

Yet the broader and more entrenched threat to Europe comes not just from Trump, but from the rise of populism within European nations themselves. Populist movements across Europe echo Trumpism’s themes of nationalism, skepticism of global institutions, and rejection of political elites. 

Countries like Hungary and Poland, where right-wing populist governments are already in power, have seen democratic institutions erode under the guise of populist rule. Even in traditionally stable democracies such as France, the Netherlands and Italy, populism is gaining momentum. Marine Le Pen's National Rally in France and Geert Wilders' PVV in the Netherlands, which emerged victorious in the 2023 elections, have used populist rhetoric to capitalize on economic uncertainty and fears over immigration and national identity. 

Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, with her right-wing government, is similarly pushing Eurosceptic and anti-immigrant policies, further fragmenting European unity. 

However, populism is not limited to right-wing movements. Left-wing populist parties such as Spain’s Podemos and Greece’s Syriza have also risen in response to anti-austerity sentiment and economic inequality, destabilizing traditional political structures. Regardless of ideology, these movements polarize societies, challenging the stability of European governance.

Although Trump’s election could exacerbate populism in the US and Europe, it is critical to recognize that populism is not confined to Trump’s leadership. As I have shown with Gloria Gennaro and Giampaolo Lecce in a recently published paper, populist rhetoric in the US is strategically used by outsider candidates, particularly in competitive races and regions facing economic insecurity. 

This tactic mobilizes disillusioned voters, but risks alienating core supporters in less competitive districts. Populism is not merely an ideological stance or a reflection of voter demand, but a calculated tool to maximize electoral success under certain conditions. The research underscores the adaptability of populism in political campaigns, as candidates modify their strategies based on local economic and political factors.

In the 2024 presidential campaign, even Kamala Harris has adopted more populist rhetoric, particularly on economic issues that resonate with the working class. At a campaign rally in North Carolina, Harris framed the election as a battle for the future of America, addressing issues such as economic inequality, social justice and the protection of democracy. She positioned herself, however as the underdog, and the "underdog" message – alongside her people-centered rhetoric – struck a chord with voters. 

Interestingly, at a similar rally in Philadelphia, Harris’ populist tone was less intense, illustrating how candidates tailor populist rhetoric based on regional dynamics. As predicted by our model, a presidential candidate is more likely to adopt a more populist approach in a swing state, as North Carolina could be considered.

The broader threat of populism is not exclusive to Trump or any one country. Its strategic use by politicians seeking electoral gains, especially by framing the narrative as a struggle between the “virtuous people” and the “corrupt elite”, taps into economic and social discontent. 

This strategy, while effective in competitive races, risks deepening polarization and undermining democratic institutions, prioritizing short-term electoral victories over long-term stability. Even in democratic environments like the US, the pervasive use of populism challenges the resilience of democratic governance.