The Myth of the Youth Climate Vote
Young voters are struggling economically and worried about rent, jobs, and debt. So why do advocates continue to say Democrats should put climate first?
Last weekend, former Washington Governor Jay Inslee took to the Washington Post to encourage Democrats to believe the unbelievable. Inslee, now head of Climate Power’s Accountability War Room, urged the party to ‘lean in’ on environmentalism, presenting climate change and clean energy as tools to grow support among Gen-Z voters, including those who voted for Trump. This proposal is a staggering denial of the reality of the youth vote.
As Inslee correctly notes, young Trump voters prioritized economic issues above all in 2024, despite being more progressive than other GOP voters on other political issues. That’s true of all Gen-Z voters: in a survey from Third Way, voters 18-34 were more likely to list economic concerns as their top issue than any other age group. A plurality, 42%, of young voters listed economic issues as their top concern. Gen-Z isn’t just focused on the economy – they’re the voters most focused on the economy.
Gen-Z is right to be worried. Research shows that they’re spending more on essentials like car insurance and housing than previous generations, and wages simply aren’t keeping pace. Gen-Zers also have more debt, including credit card debt, than previous generations, a problem made worse by rising costs from inflation and reckless tariffs from the Trump administration.
While younger voters care about addressing climate change, that interest understandably pales in comparison to their economic concerns. In our survey, just 4% of young voters list fighting climate change as their top priority in the 2024 cycle. Even when given the chance to rank multiple high-priority issues, a survey from Pew shows that young voters remain money-motivated: 67% of young voters rank strengthening the economy as a ‘top priority,’ compared with just 39% who list climate among their core concerns.
Pew also finds that young voters are no more interested in tackling climate change than their elders are, with 38% of 18-49-year-olds, 31% of 50-64-year-olds, and 39% of voters over 65 including climate among their priority issues. Not only are young voters not prioritizing climate, but the data also shows they’re no more motivated to do so than their parents and grandparents.
The solution here isn’t to focus resources and energy on elevating climate to the top of young voters’ political wishlists. Don’t attempt to change their priorities – meet them where they are instead. Democrats must present a compelling strategy to lower costs, raise wages, and put young people on the path to economic prosperity. Clean energy can be part of the solution. Our research shows that some of the most effective clean energy messages emphasize that clean energy creates stable, well-paying jobs in a rapidly growing industry. Among young voters, climate change ranks below job creation, energy independence, lower energy costs, public health, and global economic competition as a reason to support clean energy buildout. Even if we’re talking clean energy, the data is clear: climate doesn’t move voters nearly as much as pocketbook issues.
Around this time last summer, before President Biden dropped out of the presidential race, prominent politicos in DC and beyond encouraged Democrats to disbelieve their eyes, to ignore the President’s visible decline and trust that he’d get the job done in November. That denial cost us the presidency. Now, Inslee and his peers in the environmental movement are urging Democrats to once again close our eyes and jump. They ask that we cast aside robust public opinion research and data on rising costs and believe that hammering climate policy will win back young voters and put Democrats back in power.
Ask yourself, where did rejecting the evidence of our eyes and ears get us last time around?
Josh Freed is Senior Vice President for Climate & Energy at Third Way.
 | A guest post by
|
A recent article by Ezra Klein in the NYTimes entitled Democrats Need to Face Why Trump won, an interview with Daniel Shor, spelled out clearly what party was favored on issues and how important those issues were for voters. Transcript at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/18/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-david-shor.html
Actually, the environment was one of the strongest issue where voters favored the Democrats, by a 10% margin, which was higher than the other main D advantages in healthcare and abortion. True it was not rated as important as the economic issues, but on those the Rs had the advantage.
Matt Yglesias also posted an article this week to the effect of going easy on the environment.
So, true the environment is not that important to voters, but it also is an advantage issue for the Dems if they avoid going full Al Gore on it, it would work.
And the Dems did not campaign on the environment particularly, but on abortion and greedy companies and Trump's threat to Democracy. And the survey showed that voters favored the Dems more on the environment than abortion and thought it was a more important issue. Healthcare was more important but their margin was slimmer.
So I would actually bump up the environment in the ways the author mentioned, but if Dems want to capture the uber important economic issues, as indeed the three most important issues to voters were Cost of Living, the Economy and Taxes, all which they favored the Rs on, with healthcare then emerging in 4th, then they need to come up with new policies as those issues work for the Rs.
Now Trump may give us a bonanza by worsening inflation, but I think the Dems have always been weakest on taxes. If there is one truth it is that people dont like to pay taxes and they link taxes to the Democrats.
True the majority of GOP tax cuts go to the wealthiest, but they do give some to the middle, where the Dems might tax the wealthy more but they spend the money. Voters saw Trump cut their taxes, and ignore the fact that more went to the wealthy and he increased the debt. My suggestion would be to run on giving a big middle class tax cut offset by higher taxes on the wealthy, rather than the usual Dem playbook of coming up with more social programs like forgiving student loans.