Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Young LGBT people are more politically engaged than the rest of Generation Z

Opinion

Deckman is a professor of political science at Washington College. Kromer is director of the Sarah T. Hughes Field Politics Center at Goucher College.

Last year's midterm elections were a "rainbow wave," with more openly lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people elected to public office than at any other time in American history.

According to the Victory Fund, a political action committee that supports LGBT candidates, a record 627 openly LGBT candidates ran for public office in 2018, with 399 appearing on the general election ballot.

However, LGBT Americans still remain woefully underrepresented in political office, which suggests that political participation by older generations of LGBT Americans is less frequent than political activism by their straight counterparts. This dynamic, however, may be changing with future generations.

Recent surveys on young Americans in their late teens and early 20s — including one we conducted — reveal that the youngest generation of LGBT Americans is far more engaged in politics than their straight counterparts.


In a June 2017 national survey of 2,023 young Americans age 15 to 24 conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute and MTV, one in 10 young Americans identified as LGBT.

This group of LGBT Americans reported higher levels of engagement on seven separate measures of political and civic participation.

Young LGBT Americans were roughly twice as likely as their straight counterparts to report attending a political rally or demonstration, donating money to a political campaign or contacting an elected official. They were also much more likely to engage in online political activism, whether that involved signing a petition, posting about an issue that mattered to them, or following or liking a political campaign.

Combining these individual acts of political participation into a scale, the average young LGBT American reported participating in 3.7 political activities in the past year. Meanwhile, young straight Americans averaged 2.1 activities.

This difference in behavior is also present among members of what we call the "activist class": the young people who have indicated a strong desire to run for office one day.

In May, we conducted a survey of alumni of IGNITE, a nonprofit that trains young women to run for public office, to better understand how they benefited from the organization's programming. We also wanted to understand their views about political engagement more generally and to get a better sense of their political identities.

Here, we focus on the 410 respondents who are 18 to 24 years old.

Seventy-two percent of IGNITE respondents identified themselves as heterosexual and female. The rest identified with another sexual orientation (homosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual or something else) or gender identity (transgender, gender queer, gender nonconforming or something else). Given the current estimates of the number of openly LGBT Americans nationally, IGNITE is drawing a disproportionately high number of LGBT participants to its programming.

On all comparable measures, IGNITE participants who identify as LGBT reported higher levels of political engagement than straight IGNITE participants, although the differences are not nearly as stark as those in the PRRI survey.

(This may be a reflection of the fact that the IGNITE alumni are a group that self-selected into a women's political training program and thus are more likely to be politically engaged compared with the average 18- to 24-year-old.)

LGBT IGNITE participants averaged four political activities in the past year, compared with 3.2 activities done by heterosexual women.

Both surveys show that this new generation of young LGBT Americans resoundingly rejects both conservatism and the GOP. This may be a factor in their heightened engagement.

Donald Trump's presidency could also be sparking interest in political action. For example, Trump's support of the right of business owners to refuse service to gay Americans because of religious differences has outraged the LGBT community. In the PRRI/MTV study, fewer than 6 percent of LGBT respondents had a favorable view of Trump.

In the IGNITE sample, 57 percent of LGBT women said that Trump's election encouraged them to participate in politics, compared with just 50 percent of the straight women.

Moreover, the PRRI/MTV survey found that only 8 percent of young LGBT Americans identify as conservative, compared with 25 percent of their straight counterparts. More than half of LGBT Americans in the PRRI/MTV poll are Democrats, with just 8 percent declaring they are Republican. The rest identify as independent or with a third party.

The IGNITE survey paints an even bleaker picture for the political right when it comes to young, activist members of the LGBT community. No LGBT respondents to the IGNITE survey identified themselves as a conservative or Republican.

There is very little research on the political engagement of LGBT Americans historically, either because many such Americans may have been reluctant to disclose their status, or because most older surveys did not ask about sexual orientation. So, we can't say for sure if this younger cohort of LGBT Americans participates more in politics than previous generations.

But our work suggests that political engagement among young Americans will largely be driven by progressive activists, including a disproportionate number of LGBT Americans.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Conversation

Read More

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., January 29, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chen Mengtong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Summary

On June 9, 2025, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), dismissed all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Secretary Kennedy claimed the move was necessary to eliminate “conflicts of interest” and restore public trust in vaccines, which he argued had been compromised by the influence of pharmaceutical companies. However, this decision strays from precedent and has drawn significant criticism from medical experts and public health officials across the country. Some argue that this shake-up undermines scientific independence and opens the door to politicized decision-making in vaccine policy.

Background: What Is ACIP?

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is a federal advisory group that helps guide national vaccine policy. Established in 1964, it has over 60 years of credibility as an evidence-based body of medical and scientific experts. ACIP makes official recommendations on vaccine schedules for both children and adults, determining which immunizations are required for school entry, covered by health insurance, and prioritized in public health programs. The committee is composed of specialists in immunology, epidemiology, pediatrics, infectious disease, and public health, all of whom are vetted for scientific rigor and ethical standards. ACIP’s guidance holds national weight, shaping both public perception of vaccines and the policies of institutions like schools, hospitals, and insurers.

Keep ReadingShow less
MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border
Way into future, RPA Airmen participate in Red Flag 16-2 > Creech ...

MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border

FT HUACHUCA, Ariz. - Inside a windowless and dark shipping container turned into a high-tech surveillance command center, two analysts peered at their own set of six screens that showed data coming in from an MQ-9 Predator B drone. Both were looking for two adults and a child who had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and had fled when a Border Patrol agent approached in a truck.

Inside the drone hangar on the other side of the Fort Huachuca base sat another former shipping container, this one occupied by a drone pilot and a camera operator who pivoted the drone's camera to scan nine square miles of shrubs and saguaros for the migrants. Like the command center, the onetime shipping container was dark, lit only by the glow of the computer screens.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

As Trump’s second presidency unfolds, rural America—the foundation of his 2024 election win—is feeling the sting. From collapsing export markets to cuts in healthcare and infrastructure, those very voters are losing faith.

Getty Images, ablokhin

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Daryl Royal, the 20-year University of Texas football coach, once said, “You've gotta dance with them that brung ya.” The modern adaptation of that quote is “you gotta dance with the one who brought you to the party.” The expression means you should remain loyal to the people or things that helped you succeed.

Sixty-three percent of America’s 3,144 counties are predominantly rural, and Donald Trump won 93 percent of those counties in 2024. Analyses show that rural counties have become increasingly solid Republican, and Trump’s margin of victory within rural America reached a new high in the 2024 election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules
white concrete dome museum

Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules

Trust in elections is fragile – and once lost, it is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. While Democrats and Republicans disagree on many election policies, there is broad bipartisan agreement on one point: executive branch interference in elections undermines the constitutional authority of states and Congress to determine how elections are run.

Recent executive branch actions threaten to upend this constitutional balance, and Congress must act before it’s too late. To be clear – this is not just about the current president. Keeping the executive branch out of elections is a crucial safeguard against power grabs by any future president, Democrat or Republican.

Keep ReadingShow less