Thin Populist Appeals and Democratic Backsliding Through Candidate Legitimization and Elite Delegitimization

Do thin populist appeals from elites increase support for democratic backsliding at the individual level and, if so, how? Using a set of four national survey experiments in the U.S. (N = 3,731), this paper tests prior arguments that populist appeals from elites increase mass support for democratic backsliding and the legitimacy mechanisms through which scholars have posited that this occurs. Study One replicates prior research finding that populist appeals from elites increase support for violating democratic principles. Study Two reproduces this result while also finding evidence for two mechanisms postulated in the literature: candidate legitimization and elite delegitimization. Based on these results, Studies Three and Four are pre-registered studies that assess if populist appeals from elites increase public support for democratic backsliding through the candidate legitimization and elite delegitimization mechanisms. The results suggest people-centrism increases candidate legitimacy and electability. However, anti-elitism increases elite delegitimization and support for violating democratic principles. Therefore, the unique components of populist appeals appear to work in unique yet complementary ways to increase public support for democratic backsliding.