What is populism and how is it touching down in Utah?

(Illustration by Alex Cochran for Utah News Dispatch)

This article is part of U.S. Democracy Day, a nationwide collaborative on Sept. 15, the International Day of Democracy, in which news organizations cover how democracy works and the threats it faces. To learn more, visit usdemocracyday.org.

It was a standout moment after a bitter Republican primary in the race for Utah’s next governor. 

In a scrum with reporters after election night results showed he’d won handily over his Republican challenger Rep. Phil Lyman, incumbent Gov. Spencer Cox bristled when reporters asked him how “attacks from the right” impacted him during campaign season. 

“I want to be clear. Those attacks don’t come from the right. Populism is not ‘the right.’ Populism is not conservatism,” Cox said. “This is something different.” 

Lyman’s primary campaign — now continuing on as a longshot write-in candidate after refusing to accept the primary loss and even a failed attempt to contest the election — largely employs an attack strategy against Cox, painting him as corrupt or out of touch with regular Utahns while accusing him of not being a true conservative. 

Cox, who is now competing against Democratic candidate Rep. Brian King and a host of other third-party candidates in a red state that has elected a Republican governor for the past four decades, argued his GOP opponent’s strategy was not true conservatism. 

“There is nothing conservative about tearing other people down. There is nothing conservative about destroying the institutions that make us great. There is nothing conservative about treating our fellow Americans with contempt,” Cox said. “I challenge the notion that we aren’t the most conservative team in this race. We aren’t the most populist team, that’s for sure. But we are the most conservative team in this race.”

There was that term again — “populist.” 

In response to Cox’s victory speech, Lyman later posted a 34-minute video on YouTube in which he critiqued Cox’s remarks and continued to cast doubt on the election and Cox’s qualification via signature gathering. He called Cox a “little weasel” and criticized the governor for warning against the destruction of trust in institutions and fellow Americans.

“Because we all know in America that we better trust the government,” Lyman said sarcastically. “What could possibly go wrong.”

In the video, Lyman didn’t address Cox’s characterization of his campaign as “populist” — though he chuckled when Cox took issue with the characterization of “attacks from the right.” 

“Somebody struck a nerve,” Lyman said, smiling.

It was an illustrative moment of not just a deepening divide within the Republican party, but of the state of politics as a whole in Utah as well as the rest of the nation. Utah’s Republican primary was a testing ground for MAGA-style politics in a state that’s taken longer than others to come around to Donald Trump — as well as a stage where populist rhetoric reared its head far more than it has in the past in this state. 

Cox’s victory speech was perhaps the first time he’d publicly called it out by name. Lyman, in his video, didn’t dispute the label — but he also hasn’t fully embraced it. He has run as a Republican, not a populist (though technically he’s now an unaffiliated write-in candidate for the remainder of the governor’s race). 

So this begs the question: What is populism? And is it taking root in Utah? 

People walk through the Capitol in Salt Lake City on the last night of the legislative session, Friday, March 1, 2024. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch)

What is populism?

Utah’s own Brigham Young University has a professor who teaches comparative politics and who co-authored a book about populism, its trends around the world, and the evidence that it played a notable role in Trump’s 2016 campaign rhetoric. He also directs Team Populism, a global scholarly network that studies populism’s causes and consequences. 

In an interview with Utah News Dispatch, Kirk Hawkins explained what populism is — and how to identify it. He said doing so can be tricky because it’s more of a “frame” or a “political world view” rather than a set of specific policy stances. That’s why, he said, populism can appear on both the left and right. For example, he pointed to Vermont U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders as having espoused populist rhetoric, and so has Trump

“It frames (issues) as part of a struggle between the will of the common people and an evil, conspiring elite,” Hawkins said. “So what makes something populist is really the way they talk about the issues.” 

Populism, he said, has been around as long as democracy, though it’s more apparent in countries in Latin America, where corruption can run deep. “If you have a belief in ordinary people deserving to vote and to decide what their government does,” he said that comes along with democratic ideals — but populism begins to surface when the political rhetoric stokes a good-versus-evil or Manichaen worldview. 

Populism has cropped up throughout the U.S.’s history. There was an actual Populist Party in the 1890s, when William Jennings Bryan ran as a Democratic presidential candidate. At the time, populism surged as the U.S. entered an industrial era, and railroads and banks grew in power. That, along with mechanization in the industrial sector threatened American farmers’ financial stability — and movements to protect farmers’ interests helped give rise to the People’s Party, or the Populist Party. 

Compared to other countries, however, the U.S. has not seen as high levels of populism as other countries, even today.

“Whatever the populist tenor of the moment is,” Hawkins said, “you have to understand it’s not new. But it does come and go. And there are moments we have when it’s really strong and we have candidates that are speaking it, and it’s kind of crazy and scary. And then there are other times when nobody’s talking that way, so it ebbs and flows.” 

So what are some factors that cause populism to ebb and flow? 

Hawkins pointed to other countries like Equador, Venezuela, or even European countries like Italy or Spain recently, where “you tend to see more of it. And what we see is that populism resonates with people when they see problems around them — policy failures — they can point to as intentional decisions of their politicians as having created that situation.” 

What really stokes it, though, Hawkins said, is when there is “a lot of corruption in the government.” 

Though the U.S. ranks low compared to other countries when it comes to corruption, there has been a simmering perception of corruption that’s played a part in the country’s politics in recent years. More specifically though, Hawkins said there appears to be “two big things” pushing populism here, and they both relate to globalization — or how trade and technology has increased connections throughout the world. 

“There’s an economic side of that, and there’s a cultural side of that,” Hawkins said. “On the economic side when people lose their jobs because factories are getting off-shored to places like Mexico or China or Southeast Asia, they’re going to look around and say, ‘Hey, why is my government not only not helping me with the transition and the problems this is causing, but it looks like their trade policies created it. So I’m going to get really angry at them about this.’”

Frustrations over “cultural globalization,” Hawkins said, can happen when people who have a perhaps “more traditional set of views” feel attacked for harboring more conservative stances — such as on LGBTQ+ issues — that can lead them to feel like a more progressive government is working against them. 

“If I feel like my politicians are saying, ‘Well, you’re just a crazy bigot, and we’re just going to implement these policies that make you feel threatened and violate your sense of what a good community is about, and we’re going to make fun of you if you oppose those policies,’” Hawkins said, that can give rise to populist attitudes. 

Trump’s populist patterns

In 2016, Trump’s presidential campaign took advantage of these simmering frustrations and rode the wave into the White House in a way his opponents and pundits didn’t see coming.

It was rhetoric that America hadn’t really seen in more than a century, Hawkins said. Notably, he said Trump’s populism was a “little harder to pin down, mostly because it’s inconsistent.” However, he said Trump used its framing most consistently in prepared speeches. 

In their book, Hawkins’ and co-author Levente Littvay’s introduction includes an exchange from Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward’s book, titled “Fear: Trump in the White House,” between Trump and his then political strategist, Steve Bannon:

“I love that. That’s what I am,” Trump said, “a popularist.” He mangled the words. 

“No no,” Bannon said. “It’s populist.” 

“Yeah, yeah,” Trump insisted. “A popularist.”  

The exchange — and the evidence that Trump scored higher for populist rhetoric when he gave prepared speeches, according to Hawkins’ and Littvay’s research — indicates Trump was perhaps not as intentionally populist as perhaps some members of his campaign were. 

“Closer analysis of this inconsistency reveals a great deal about his likely sincerity, and we think the picture here partially — but not entirely — confirms the suspicions of his critics who see his populism as incomplete or insincere,” Hawkins and Littvay wrote. “Our educated guess is that variability in Trump’s populism is the product of his speechwriters.”

They continued: “The fact that his debate scores are low, and that his scores tended more upward after he adopted a new campaign team in May 2016, suggests that Trump himself is not all that populist, and hence receives low scores when speaking extemporaneously. When Trump gives prepared remarks, his speechwriters help fill the gaps of his populist discourse, and he receives higher scores.”  

However, “this does not mean we should write off Trump as an insincere populist,” Hawkins and Littvay added. “The more accurate label is a ‘half populist.’” While his off-the-cuff speeches may often lack “people-centric references, anti-elite messages are present throughout.” They also noted he has always seemed to embrace “anti establishment rhetoric,” often criticizing “elites — Washington, liberals, the global financial establishment — in all his texts.” 

Trump in his earlier speeches, however, was “less likely to mention the American people or describe them as protagonists of their political system. Instead, Trump tended to refer to himself and his team as the ones who would save America and make it great again.” 

Hawkins and Littvay note in their book, though, that the U.S. in 2016 “was not experiencing extremely high levels of populism,” and Trump and other candidates were “only moderately populist in absolute terms.” 

“While some voters felt enough resentment to fuel a populist uprising, these feelings were not widespread enough to make Americans abandon the Constitution or call for a complete end to the traditional party system.” 

Is populism hitting home in Utah? 

By looking at the tone and tenor of Utah’s Republican primary this year, the answer is likely yes, in some ways. It’s likely touching down in the same way it’s been simmering across the U.S., but perhaps not as clearly as other countries. Just like how Trump’s populism is erratic, so were Utah’s candidates who appeared to mirror his style. 

Utah’s GOP primary clearly tested Trump’s influence in Utah. With Cox’s win, it showed many Utahns still balk at brash, MAGA-style rhetoric, but it also showed Republican divides are deepening, with party members that tend to resonate more with populist rhetoric. 

The 2024 primary tested Trump influence on Utah Republicans. What did it tell us?

Take the governor’s race for example. While Hawkins noted he hasn’t scientifically measured Lyman’s speeches, he said from what he’s observed, “I would bet good money that Lyman has been using a fair amount of populist rhetoric.” 

A cursory scroll of Lyman’s social media reveals populist themes. “Exposing government corruption and bringing light and truth to politics,” his bio says on X. The page often uses the hashtag #UtahCorruption, and paints him as a candidate going after Utah’s “establishment” or “elite.” 

Lyman has focused a major crux of his campaign on his failed attempts to challenge Cox’s signature gathering qualification for the primary ballot (one of two legal paths to Utah’s ballot). Lyman qualified for the GOP primary by winning 67.5% at the Utah Republican Party’s state nominating convention — and he’s spent much of his campaign catering to Republicans who favor the caucus-convention system and who have long detested the signature gathering path allowed under SB54, a law passed in 2014. 

In contrast, Hawkins said researchers have coded Cox’s past speeches “and he ranks very low” for populism. Cox, as part of his role serving as chair of the National Governors Association, even spearheaded a campaign dubbed “Disagree Better” that attempted to combat populist rhetoric. 

“He never speaks like that. He takes strong conservative positions, but he tries to be nice about it. He doesn’t demonize his opponents,” Hawkins said. “And Lyman was clearly demonizing his opponents throughout this process. Did he also accompany that with a lot of talk about the will of the people of Utah? I think he did a few times.” 

That may be a result of candidates here in Utah who resonate with Trump and therefore mimic his style — and it could also be a result of candidates who resonate with populist or populist-leaning worldviews. 

Utah Rep. Phil Lyman speaks as he debates with incumbent Gov. Spencer Cox during Utah’s gubernatorial GOP primary debate held at the Eccles Broadcast Center in Salt Lake City on Tuesday, June 11, 2024. (Pool photo by Isaac Hale/Deseret News)

Hawkins said populist rhetoric may be resonating in Utah — perhaps with many of the 45.6% or 194,639 Republicans who voted for Lyman in the primary — as frustrations with “cultural globalization.” Utah is a deeply conservative state with religion baked into its history and identity, and as the U.S. has progressively embraced LGBTQ+ rights, for example, it’s troubled conservatives. They may see the LGBTQ+ movement as something that goes against everything they believe in and something that threatens their way of life, Hawkins said. 

Then if they see a candidate like Cox “who seems to kind of soft pedal it and say, ‘Well, we need to achieve compromises with our friends in the LGBTQ community, we have issues in common, we need to work on those issues, we need to avoid demonizing other people,’ they would look at that and say, ‘Whose side are you on?’” Hawkins said. “It scares them, it unnerves them.” 

Whether or not populism and populist rhetoric gains even more traction in the U.S. and Utah is still a lingering question, though it could depend on the results of the 2024 presidential election in November. 

Hawkins said he would have thought after Trump’s 2020 loss that Republicans may have realized “you can’t win an election if you keep doing this.” But no, he said. They’ve “dug in the heels.” 

But if history tells us anything, it’s that “populist movements fizzle out after a while,” Hawkins said. That’s either because the leaders of the movement aren’t successful and end up pushed aside, “or because they come to power and then they just don’t do a good job of governing” and the people reject them. 

How historical populist movements have threatened democracy

Hawkins and Littvay wrote in their book that in general, scholars and pundits often assume populism “is bad for all kinds of political and economic outcomes,” and some also argue that populism (ironically) leads to corruption. 

They note that the evidence of these effects is “scanty,” but comparative research has clear findings that populism can indeed impact democratic institutions that “protect minority rights and prevent tyranny while still ensuring popular participation.” 

Populist candidates “can provide a wake-up call to traditional politicians that reshapes the public agenda and increases political participation,” Hawkins and Littvay wrote. However, “once in power,” populists tend to “erode checks and balances, curtail civil liberties, and undermine the fairness of electoral competition.” 

“It can get bad,” Hawkins said, pointing to countries like Venezuela or Turkey where populist government leaders have entrenched themselves, thinking “they’re the only ones who deserve to run the country” and they use that “as justification just to get rid of democracy.” 

Populism also results in polarization, Hawkins said, with rhetoric that can “tear communities apart.” Here in Utah, and the U.S., polarization is certainly apparent, especially online, but in real life it hasn’t taken root to a point where it’s vastly disrupting daily life. 

“I don’t think most people are really captured by a populist rhetoric. I don’t think that’s where they are,” he said. “As polarized as we are, I don’t think it’s as deep as bad as it could be. There a lot of people in the middle.” 

That’s what Hawkins said “gives me hope” — though he said Americans and Utahns “need to be careful” with populism and its polarization.

So where do we go from here? 

Yes, populist movements tend to fizzle out, he said. “But what’s struck me about our current moment is that, that’s not what’s happening,” he said. 

“I don’t see it fizzling out. If it didn’t after 2020, what happens now in 2024?” he said. “If Trump loses again, does anybody sort of step back and learn a lesson? I haven’t seen that happening yet. … I think the puzzle for us really is still a puzzle. It’s still an unknown whether this is going to go away like past populist moments have.”