Healthy and stable democracies rely on the commitment of their most critical actors: the citizens. But are citizens fit to fulfill this role? The evidence is mixed. While citizens broadly support democratic principles in the abstract, they often vote for undemocratic candidates.

This article advances the literature on democratic backsliding by exploring why citizens are willing to compromise on core democratic liberties. Drawing on a pre-registered candidate choice experiment conducted in 7 Latin American countries, we examine citizens’ commitment to democratic principles based on three factors: (i) their political orientation—left, center, or right, (ii) the type of policy at stake—whether economic, cultural, or valence issues, and (iii) different aspects of democracy, including electoral competitiveness, checks and balances, and civil liberties.

Using both between- and within-individual variations, our findings reveal that citizens prioritize policies aligned with their ideological orientation: left-leaning individuals favor leftist policies, right-leaning individuals prioritize rightist policies, and centrists focus on centrist policies. Furthermore, citizens priorities different types of policies, left-leaning citizens emphasize economic issues, while right-leaning citizens focus on cultural and social issues such as law and order.

This article makes three contributions. First, it demonstrates that the tension between abstract support for democratic norms and their practical application extends beyond the U.S. Second, it highlights that individuals trade off democratic principles for different reasons, driven by the varying salience of specific issues across ideological groups. Third, it provides insights into which aspects of democracy individuals are more likely to condone in pursuit of ideological goals.