Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
Made with Flourish

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

Made with Flourish

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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

Made with Flourish

Read More

Donald Trump being interviewed on stage

Donald Trump participated in an interivew Bloomberg editor-in-chief John Micklethwait at the Economic Club of Chicago on Oct 16.

Amalia Huot-Marchand

Trump sticks to America First policies in deeply Democratic Chicago

Huot-Marchand is a graduate student at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism.

“I do not comment on those things. But let me tell you, if I did, it would be a really smart thing to do,” boasted Donald Trump, when Bloomberg editor-in-chief John Micklethwait asked whether the former president had private phone calls with Vladimir Putin.

Welcomed with high applause and lots of laughs from the members and guests of the Economic Club of Chicago on Oct. 16, Trump bragged about his great relationships with U.S. adversaries and authoritarian leaders Putin, Xi Jinping and Kim Jung Un.

Keep ReadingShow less
Justin Levitt
Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Election lawyer Justin Levitt on why 2024 litigation is mostly hot air

Rosenfeld is the editor and chief correspondent of Voting Booth, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Justin Levitt has been on the frontlines in some of American democracy’s biggest legal battles for two decades. Now a law professor at Los Angeles’ Loyola Marymount University, he has worked as a voting rights attorney and top Justice Department civil rights attorney, and he has advised both major parties.

In this Q&A, he describes why 2024’s partisan election litigation is likely to have limited impacts on voters and counting ballots. But that won’t stop partisan propagandists and fundraising from preying on voters.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stop the Steal rally in Washington, DC

"If that level of voter fraud is set to happen again, isn’t voting just a waste of time?" asks Clancy.

Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images

If you think the 2020 election was stolen, why vote in 2024?

Clancy is co-founder of Citizen Connect and a board member of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund. Citizen Connect is an initiative of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, which also operates The Fulcrum.

I’m not here to debate whether the 2020 presidential election involved massive voter fraud that made Joe Biden’s victory possible. There has been extensive research, analysis and court cases related to that topic and nothing I say now will change your mind one way or the other. Nothing will change the fact that tens of millions of Americans believe Biden was not legitimately elected president.

So let’s assume for the sake of argument that there actually was game-changing election fraud that unjustly put Biden in the White House. If that was the case, what are the odds that Donald Trump would be “allowed” to win this time? If that level of voter fraud is set to happen again, isn’t voting just a waste of time?

Keep ReadingShow less
People lined up to get food

People line up at a food distribution event in Hartford, Conn., hosted by the Hispanic Families at Catholic Charities, GOYA food, and CICD Puerto Rican Day Parade

Belén Dumont

Not all Hartford Latinos will vote but they agree on food assistance

Dumont is a freelance journalist based in Connecticut.

The Fulcrum presents We the People, a series elevating the voices and visibility of the persons most affected by the decisions of elected officials. In this installment, we explore the motivations of over 36 million eligible Latino voters as they prepare to make their voices heard in November.

Keep ReadingShow less