The European refugee crisis sparked many debates within the European Union member states, as European countries had different ideas about handling the situation. As a result to the long negotiations without decisions, the crisis escalated, resulting in anti-immigrant, populist parties to emerge with big support among European citizens. The Hungarian government was among the first countries in the European Union to capitalise upon the refugee crisis by politicising the question of immigration, therefore, several anti-immigration campaigns were initiated in Hungary during 2015 and 2016. By analysing and comparing two campaign materials (one from 2015 and one from 2016) via the three-dimensional critical discourse analysis model of Fairclough, the thesis sought to identify the milestones and the rhetoric shifts of the communication of the Hungarian government that changed the public discourse in Hungary, as well as to point out similarities with populist practices in the anti-immigrant campaigns. The empirical analysis was carried out in the theoretical framework of discourse and power, populism, post-factuality, and agenda setting and framing. The text argued for a rhetorical shift between 2015 and 2016, in which the target of the governmental communication changed from refugees towards the European Union and its immigration policy. The thesis found evidence for the usage of populist practices that vastly affected the way Hungarians approach the question of immigration. It is hoped that this thesis could highlight the imbalance in the power relations of the public discourse in Hungary, and the findings could contribute to further analyses of populist campaigns in the period of the European refugee crisis.