Abstract:  How do women leaders shape the agendas of populist radical right (PRR) parties, and how does this in turn impact nativist parties’ electoral appeal? Historically male-dominated PRR parties are now increasingly led by women. Yet, research has not systematically examined how women-led PRR parties recalibrate priorities, or what influence this has on perceptions of the party. To shed light on these questions, we combine observational and experimental evidence. In the first stage, we describe key differences between men- and women-led PRR parties using manifesto data from 15 Western European countries (1988 to 2025). We find that women-led PRR parties broaden issue agendas, increasing attention to areas such as environmental protection, labour policy, and cultural policy. In the second stage, we test the effects of these appeals through a survey experiment manipulating leader gender, agenda breadth, and rhetorical framing. We draw on role congruity theory, which distinguishes between (masculine) agentic political communication, emphasising strength and authority, and (feminine) communal communication, emphasising care and collective wellbeing. Our results show that simply broadening the issue agenda does not consistently reduce perceived extremism or increase support. Instead, responses depend on how the expanded platform is communicated. Agentic framing increases perceptions of ideological radicalism, whereas communal framing improves leader favourability and increases vote likelihood. These effects do not vary systematically by leader gender or respondent gender. The findings offer new insights into how women leaders reshape party agendas, and the conditions under which such issue expansion influences perceptions of nativist parties.

Keywords:  gender and politics; party agendas; populist radical right; women’s political leadership

Published:   3 September 2026

Issue:   Vol 14 (2026): From the Far-Right to the Far-Left: Women Populist Leaders in Comparative Perspective (In Progress)