In their latest study, published in East European Politics, Bence Hamrak, Erin Jenne, Levente Littvay, and Gábor Simonovits examined voters' perceptions of the Soros campaign.

Right-wing populist leaders have long vilified left-wing activist George Soros to justify their policies. They accuse Soros and his organizations of being globalist elites who attack national sovereignty and traditional family values. The accusations themselves are loaded with antisemitic tropes. Despite this, it is unclear whether these populist, anti-elite messages effectively persuade citizens, or if antisemitic appeals specifically drive their impact.

To answer these questions, the scholars conducted a survey experiment in Hungary mimicking the Hungarian government's propaganda, which sometimes uses Soros as a symbol to mobilise support. The research shows that a random Soros endorsement reduced policy support among pro-government respondents but increased it among anti-government ones. This suggests that Soros-bashing serves as a partisan cue in populist communication, helping to shape constituent preferences. However, overt antisemitic priming did not amplify the effects of Soros cues on policy preferences. These findings highlight the potential and limits of populist elite cueing.

The full study is available here.