Mind the (generation) gap
By Sophia Winner
Editor’s note: Red and blue, yes. But age explains our political attitudes and behavior, too.
In this piece, Sophia Winner, Research Program Coordinator at the SNF Agora Institute, unpacks findings from the recent report, “Examining Generational Divides – Political Attitudes and Behavior.” Read on!
I’m Gen Z. At 22 years old, I’ve never voted in a presidential election that didn’t feel existential. I learned what “government shutdown” meant before I learned how taxes actually work. My high school civics education included a pandemic, an insurrection, and the phrase “unprecedented times” said so often it lost all meaning.
So when older leaders talk about democratic erosion like it’s a shocking new development, I am left wondering: compared to when?
Recent polling from the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University underscores my reaction. This survey of 4,500 Americans shows that, beyond red versus blue, the real divide is generational.
Different ages. Different algorithms.
As we know, Boomers and Gen X primarily rely on cable, broadcast television, and local news. Gen Z overwhelmingly turns to social media for information — 74 percent cite online platforms as a top source, compared to 24 percent of Boomers.
For those who get their news online, YouTube is a common platform across all age groups. Among Gen Z, Instagram and TikTok are becoming more popular, blending news and social media in ways that make it hard to know if you’re informed or just entertained.
If “words make worlds,” then each generation is living in its own version of reality — one shaped by the content they consume the most.
What do these different worlds look like?
Boomers are far more likely to describe the opposing party as “evil” or even “less than human.” While younger Americans are less likely to depict opponents in moralized terms, Gen Z is nearly 30 percentage points more likely to justify political violence under certain conditions.
When it comes to cognitive frameworks, older generations are more susceptible to “us versus them” thinking — a pattern likely influenced by Cold War-era rhetoric and legacy media consumption — where trust in the system coexists with a deep suspicion of perceived “outsiders.”
Younger generations, by contrast, are more likely to interpret societal shortcomings as evidence of system failure rather than of external threat. They are also less anchored to rigid conceptions of who includes “us” and who constitutes “them.” This shift may be shaped, in part, by a cultural climate more attuned to social justice and critiques of institutional bias, or a heightened exposure to fragmented algorithms in online media environments.
Where do these divides manifest?
Let’s start with political identity: if older Americans feel represented, younger Americans feel detached.
When asked how they describe themselves within their party, younger voters gravitate toward broad coalitions, not individual leaders. Among Gen Z Republicans, 34 percent identify as MAGA and 42 percent as Moderate. Among Gen Z Democrats, 39 percent identify as Progressive and 29 percent as Socialist.
Boomers? They’re more likely to identify with specific leaders — Trump or Reagan for Republicans, Biden or Obama for Democrats.
That contrast matters. Younger Americans appear less connected to political figures and more aligned with ideological movements. While identification with individual leaders can serve as a proxy for perceived representation (signaling a sense of being seen and having faith that someone in a position of power is actually speaking on your behalf), coalition-based identities may suggest ideological alignment without the same sense of representation.
Honestly, I don’t blame my generation for feeling this way — when most of your formative political memories involve dysfunction and disillusionment, it’s hard to feel represented by people in charge who are older than your parents.
This detachment resurfaces when we ask about the system itself.
A little over 60 percent of Gen Z and Millennials say the structure of American government needs significant change no matter who we elect. More than half also say their own party needs to dramatically change.
Those aged 65 and older see it differently. A majority say the system is fundamentally fine so long as we elect the right people to represent us, and that their party is moving in the right direction.
Political trust vs. suspicion
Political trust reveals another dimension of division: older Americans tend to trust the system’s design, but distrust the people and institutions operating within it; younger generations are more likely to believe the institutions themselves are outdated, but are less likely to perceive them as being manipulated.
This distinction shows up in conspiratorial beliefs about hidden power: respondents aged 65 and older are 12 percentage points more likely than those aged 18 to 25 to believe that the people who really ‘run’ the country are not known to the voters, and that much of our lives are being controlled by plots hatched in secret places.
Thus, older voters’ skepticism seems more rooted in who controls the system, while younger voters are more concerned with how the system is designed.
These sentiments are reflected in reform priorities: younger generations are more open to structural reforms that would reshape entire systems — like making it easier for third-party candidates to run for office. Older generations favor reforms that limit individual power, such as congressional term limits.
Bridging the gap
If democracy depends on shared expectations, we have to acknowledge we’re not starting from the same place. If we’re arguing about solutions without agreeing on the diagnosis, we’re not just divided — we’re speaking different democratic dialects.
Bridging this gap will require more than momentary appeals across age groups. It necessitates investment in generationally-informed strategies that recognize how different age groups forge political identities and beliefs. Understanding these differences — and the experiences that have shaped them — is what will allow us to create the space needed to connect across them.
Sophia Winner is a Research Program Coordinator at the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University.
Have thoughts on this piece? You can submit a pitch to Democracy Notes Perspectives here.
"Bridging this gap will require more than momentary appeals across age groups." - I'm sad to admit that when I first read this I read it as "...more than monetary appeals..." and it made perfect sense to me as such. I'm officially in GenX but really more like a millennial and feel these disconnects all the time!