Populism, Conspiracy Theories, and Political Preferences for Federal Office in the US

The onset of the “post-truth” era, characterized by the accretion of conspiracy theories and “fake news”, has generally coincided with a rise in right-wing populist groups and politicians who are often the receptors and propagators of such conspiracy theories. The proposed research project intends to focus on the way in which conspiracy theories are incorporated into populist rhetoric by politicians and its effect on their supporters, arguing that conspiracism is not simply a tendency of populism but also holds instrumental value; the populist radical right can use them to either demonize their opponent, resulting a lower tendency of voters to cast their ballot for them or produce a “rallying” effect whereby more voters flock to support the populist candidate. Given the lack of detailed data concerning adherence to certain conspiracy theories, the author incorporates a new method for studying conspiracism in political candidates: data concerning an interest in two political conspiracy theories emphasized by Donald Trump, the Clinton Body Count conspiracy theory and Birtherism, from Google Trends. Taking the case of Donald Trump’s 2016 Presidential campaign, the results demonstrate a significantly positive relationship between these two prominent conspiracy theories used in Trump’s political rhetoric and votes for him on the state level, which suggests that conspiracy theories play an important role in framing populist arguments. In the second empirical chapter, the data acquired from Google Trends is merged with individual-level survey data from the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey so as to test for the “demonization” and “rallying” effects associated with conspiratorial rhetoric by investigating divergences in voting behavior based on whether there is high or low interest in the aforementioned conspiracy theories in their state. The utilization of a multi-level model demonstrates voters were less likely to vote for Clinton in states where interest in anti-Clinton conspiracy theories was highest, testifying to the existence of a “demonization” effect. Meanwhile, in those states where interest in Birtherism was highest, which was primarily used during the 2016 election as an attempt to mobilize a core set of voters, voters were more likely to vote in favor of Donald Trump. The results of both series of tests testify to the significant role that conspiracy theories played in the 2016 election and provide evidence as to the consequences of such conspiratorial rhetoric. Finally, through the use of quantitative methods, the current study comes to several conclusions as to the social basis of these two “populist” conspiracy theories. The anti-Clinton conspiracy theories, which included allegations of high-level corruption and plots by political and financial elites, were shown to be more effective on lower-income and lower-educated cohorts of voters, as the conspiracy theory could blame an outgroup for their impoverished state. Birtherism, on the other hand, which centers around the personality of the country’s first African-American president and alleges a Muslim plot, saw conservative voters diverge in response to the conspiracy theory, likely due to the importance that cultural issues play for them.