"There are political parties that, without being populist, at election time tend toward a populist discourse that is more simplified and emotional, and that offers short-term solutions," according to Carmen Llamas, a researcher at the University of Navarra, within the framework of an international conference sponsored by the Institute for Culture and Society (ICS) at the University of Navarra.

"Candidates feel increasing pressure to reach citizens and capture their vote," Llamas explains. This is especially true for new partiesand for existing parties with new leaders "as is the case of PP and PSOE," she notes. According to the expert, they try to persuade citizens to change their minds, andare especially focused on capturing votes from undecided voters.

It is important, in her opinion, to differentiate between primary discourse, which is properly political, from discourse generated on social networks. "Both are valid, but each one has its place. Unfortunately, in election season, they become so similar that they are sometimes confused." In addition, she worries about Twitter’s promotion of increasingly emotional reactions.

In this line, the researcher maintains that it is important that the media not highlight statements on Twitter or other types of discourse over the politician’s primary discourse. In addition, she believes that the work of journalists is key because "they bring political discourse, as well as other narratives, to citizens in their context."

Contemporary political discourse in movement

"Before, political discourse was much more rational and now it is much more expressive," Llamas explains. This means that citizens have the feeling of always being in a pre-election cycle, she says. "The fact that speech is more emotional today keeps it in constant movement." Before, when there was a crisis situation, politicians came up with a series of solutions and this is very difficult to change. However, today speech is more emotional, critical; it presents how citizens feel, which is "increasingly fickle."

As an example, Llamas mentions speech around corruption cases within the speaker’s political party. In addition to reasoning that it will never happen again, the speaker tends to point to instances of greater corruption in the other party, even if in truth it is not more serious.

Carmen Llamas co-organized, with Ruth Breeze, the international conference “In the name of the people: representing the people in twenty-first century politics.”Issues such as this, as well as nationalist discourse, discourse on violence against women in politicsin Europe, discourse on migration, populist discourse in Europe and other countries such as Venezuela, etc. were discussed. The activity is part of ICS’s DEMOS project and received financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and the European Regional Development Fund.