Interestingly enough, no. In the north, it is fairly obvious that slavery was never supported in any meaningful way after the Revolution.

However, in the South by 1890, the populist movement had taken hold. These were not the Populists of the midwest, rather they were populists with a white supremacist bent, in South Carolina, most notably they were headed by Benjamin Tillman. To give you an idea of their ideology, they supported the small farmer, but after Booker T. Washington was invited to the White House by T. Roosevelt, Tillman famously exclaimed "Now we will have to kill 1000 niggers to put them back in their place" (Paraphrase but the idea is the same as is the number).

Now these deep south populists did not like the former plantation aristocrats, known as Bourbons. In South Carolina, Bourbons like Wade Hampton actually began to court the freed African American vote in order to retain power. One of the key tenets of Tillman's populism was the disenfranchisement of blacks. Finally achieved with the establishment of Jim Crow in 1895, the disenfranchisement pretty much eliminated any remaining power held by former slave owners.

So, by the 1890s the yeoman farmers (the majority of southern whites) saw the planters as the enemy, so anything giving them power was bad. This attitude likely extended to slavery. That being said, just because they didn't want a return to slave days doesn't mean they supported any kind of African american equality.

Source: Pitchfork Ben Tillman by Francis Butler Simkins

u/Patriot_Historian made a good point about the racial views of the populists in the 1890s. I would like to add one about economic motivations.

Initially resisted by landowners in the late 1860s and early 1870s, sharecropping was an economic system where black laborers signed contracts with landowners to cultivate a specified piece of land. In some cases, laborers would receive 1/3 of the crop in exchange for labor if the landowner provided certain farm implements. The freedmen could in some cases receive as much as 1/2 of the crop if they provided these implements themselves. The reason for the resistance by landowners was because, at the time, they still held on to ideas about their absolute authority, did not like the idea that freedmen believed they were "partners" in the crop, and generally resented not being able to directly supervise black laborers work. This last point is especially important, considering the racial bias of white landowners that say African Americans as naturally lazy and thus required direct white supervision to produce the desired crop yield. These circumstances, combined with the economic depressions of the era, poor crop harvests, and freedmen resistance through demands of landownership, sharecropping had rocky beginnings to say the least.

Another issue that bothered landowners was the spread of African American lodgings all over former plantations. Previously curtailed to reside in a specific section of the plantation where supervision was easiest, black laborers spread their residences all over, thus compounding white anxieties over unsupervised blacks. Combined with the rise of independent black churches and other social institutions, sharecropping provided a modicum of independence unknown in the days of slavery.

This independence though had its downsides. From the 1870s to the 1880s, a combination of the contract system of sharecropping and the "crop lien" process by which local merchants, usually the only source of credit in the depression struck and bank devoid rural South, would leverage a portion of a white or black laborers crop in return for the necessary provisions for that year. What resulted was a state of perpetual indebtedness, where no matter how substantial a crop was produced, it rarely covered the previous years debt and the next years provision requirements. Thus, sharecropping represented a way in which landowners and merchants could keep white and black laborers in perpetual indebtedness and thus dependent on them. This level of control over poor whites is especially important, as class conflict between yeomen whites and planters was a staple of antebellum society and this sharecropping and crop lien situation proved most beneficial to postbellum landowners.

By the 1890s, many in the New South had come to realize the economic benefits of keeping white and black laborers as perpetual sharecroppers. Freed from the need of paternalistic ideology of the Good Christian Master, landowners could economically exploit sharecroppers at every turn. Where in the days of slavery, Planters were forced to provide farm implements, poor clothing, and poor food; they could not force black sharecroppers to pay for these items out of their meager personal crop returns. Black laborers were thus stuck in a perpetual state of economic dependency, keeping a stable supply of labor in the indebted rural South. Furthermore, paramilitary violence on the part of the Ku Klux Klan and poor whites kept African Americans terrorized and "in their place." This violence (particularly sexual violence against African American Women) and intimidation kept black men from the polls, reduced the possibilities of leaving your contracted land, and served as the cornerstone of the New South economy through the days of Jim Crow up into the Civil Rights Era.

Thus, many whites could look back on slavery as an system that did not provide the same economic control and was perhaps less profitable than sharecropping, renting, store ownership, and the crop lien system. While some of the elites perhaps wished for the aristocratic trappings and social control of slavery, most landowners welcomed this new economic control and rearranged social system that still kept white supremacy intact. It should be said though, that many poor whites were resentful of this situation, but that is another question for another day.

Sources: Eric Foner, Reconstruction: Americas Unfinished Revolution: 1864-1877; David Blight, Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory; Steven Hahn, A Nation Under Our Feet: Black Political Struggles in the Rural South from Slavery to the Great Migration.