(De)polarizing words: How elite rhetoric shapes affective polarization toward the radical right

Abstract This study seeks to expand the growing body of literature on affective polarization by examining the relationship between elite rhetoric and partisan animus toward the radical right in the electorate. Although several studies have looked into affective polarization toward radical right parties (RRPs) and how they are delegitimized in parliamentary debates, only a few have linked these two phenomena. This study investigates how negativity expressed in the parliamentary speeches of an in-party toward the RRP is related to an individual’s animus toward the radical right. I explore this relationship using the case of the Sweden Democrats (SD). Combining the National Society, Opinion, and Mass Media survey data and legislative speeches from the Riksdag from 2010 to 2021, my results show that the partisans’ affective polarization toward SD is higher when their party’s rhetoric toward SD becomes more negative. The effect of in-party negativity persists even after conventional predictors of affective polarization are added to the analysis and despite the voters’ negative attitudes toward accepting more refugees. These results enhance our understanding of how the communication behavior of elites can potentially shape perceptions and intensify animosity toward the RRP among partisans, even when they agree with the RRP on immigration issues.