Six months in, young people have soured on Trump's job handling
For context, President Trump's electoral performance with voters under 30 improved a lot in 2024: While he lost this group to former Vice President Kamala Harris, it was by a much smaller margin than in 2020. And men under 30 ended up splitting roughly evenly between Trump and Harris. These trends prompted some observers to marvel at how conservative Gen Z had become, especially young men, and to wonder whether it marked a durable change.
About half a year on from Inauguration Day, many young people have changed their minds on Trump. It looks more like many young voters gave him the benefit of the doubt when he took office, but their evaluations of him quickly started to sink. Among Americans ages 18-29, his job approval rating has fallen from a high of 55% just after he was inaugurated to 28% now. That means that half of his former approvers now disapprove. In percentage-point terms, the size of that drop is more than double what we've seen in any other age group.
Which young voters have dropped off?
Among young people, it's the less partisan and politically engaged who have seen the steepest drops. For example, about half of independents under 30 approved of Mr. Trump in February, but that has dropped to about one in five now. The same is true of young people who didn't vote in the 2024 election. Party identifiers and '24 voters have fallen off, too, but not to the same extent.
There are also differences by gender, with young men starting out more approving of Mr. Trump than young women were. Women's ratings of the president had already begun dipping by March, while it was not until April — and the downturn in the U.S. stock market — that young men's ratings started to decline. Both have fallen steadily since then, but a faster drop among young men in the last few months has meant the gender gap in approval of Mr. Trump has shrunk. (See the bottom of this article for statistical details on estimating these smaller subgroups.)
CBS News polling over the past few months offers several clues as to what young people are unhappy about these days.
A majority now say Mr. Trump is doing different things than he promised during the 2024 campaign. That's a reversal in sentiment from early February, when seven in 10 said he's doing what he said he would. And it's young men who have been the most likely to flip on this question.
On top of that, the administration is experiencing low points on several economic evaluations:
The share of young people saying the economy is getting worse has risen to six in 10. And young Americans are less likely than older ones to see the job market as good. Overtime, young people have increasingly rated it as fairly or very bad.Six in 10 also tell us that Mr. Trump's policies are making them worse off financially. That is the highest we've seen to date, and it represents a complete change from what young people expected when he was inaugurated. Back then, they were much more likely to say his policies would make them better off than worse off.And majorities feel the Trump administration is focusing too much on tariffs (72%), deportations (64%), and ending DEI programs (55%). These shares have all grown significantly over time. By contrast, seven in 10 say the administration isn't focusing enough on lowering prices, which was a key campaign issue.
Looking back and ahead…
Instead of marking a permanent rightward shift, Mr. Trump's better-than-expected performance with young voters last year is beginning to look more like a temporary reaction. Indeed, less partisan voters tend to be more responsive to short-term forces, like the economic conditions that drove many at the ballot box in 2024. And when Trump was inaugurated, many young people hoped he would turn the economy around, with his initial ratings likely reflecting some optimism. This honeymoon period quickly faded. His 18-29 rating is now below Joe Biden's when he left office.
Looking ahead to 2026, Republicans' electoral success may depend on both the president's numbers and youth turnout. If views of Mr. Trump's job handling don't improve over the next year, they could be a drag on GOP congressional candidates. And while young voters are less likely to turn out in non-presidential years, both the 2018 and 2022 midterms saw record numbers go to the polls, including voters under 30. In fact, in 2022, young voters turned out at a rate that came close to saving the Democrats' majority. In a tight contest, they could be pivotal again.
Estimating small subgroups in polls
In order to more precisely estimate trends in approval among young people, I aggregated our polls and ran a statistical model that controls for respondents' race, education level, 2024 vote, and survey date.
Why take this approach? All polls have a margin of error, and the margin of error is greater for subgroups within the poll, as a function of sample size and routine weighting. So, even though young people are represented proportionate to their share of the population, estimating what percentage of them approve of the president naturally comes with a higher margin of error. It's driven by random variation in which types of young people respond to a given poll, and margins of error grow as you slice data more thinly — for instance, in disaggregating young people by gender.
Since a single poll can only do so much, we can combine data across polls to boost sample sizes and gain confidence in our estimates. Aggregating surveys yields sample sizes of over 1,200 men and 1,300 women under 30 to analyze. And the model smoothens out poll-to-poll randomness within these subgroups.
The modeled estimates for any given time point are consistently within range of the unmodeled survey data, typically within a few points. And importantly, they tell the same story: both young men and young women's views of Trump have worsened, and the gender gap has decreased.
John Oliver: The 60 Minutes Interview
Finding the plane used for Argentina's dictatorship-era "death flights" | 60 Minutes
Immigration agent told 18-year-old U.S. citizen "you got no rights here" during arrest
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
SOS — Save Our Shipping: Trump must break China's chokehold on global trade
A high-stakes deal that would give an American company a major role in running dozens of strategically crucial global ports is now in limbo — as China aggressively demands a stake. The United States cannot let that happen. US asset manager BlackRock and its partners are vying for 43 of the world's most important shipping ports, including the two that straddle the Panama Canal. The seller is C.K. Hutchison, a major Hong Kong operator that is one of China's 'big three' port giants — and the only one not owned outright by the Chinese government. Prying these ports from China's oversight is a critical move for both US national security and the global economy. Now the Chinese Communist Party is trying to block the deal, unless its state-owned COSCO joins the buyers' group and gains veto rights over port operations. Alarmingly, all three main parties are reportedly open to letting that happen, apparently thinking that a compromised deal is better than no deal at all. But with all that's at stake, President Donald Trump should use every tool available — starting with the ongoing US-China trade talks — to push the original deal through and keep COSCO out. The 43 ports that Hutchison seeks to sell would launch a global liberation from oppressive Chinese surveillance and control. If the plan falls through — or if it's altered to add COSCO to the ownership group — China could tighten its grip on the global shipping system, by replacing a Beijing-influenced company with a Beijing-controlled one. While the media has dubbed this the 'Panama Canal deal,' it's actually much bigger. The canal, a vital artery that runs through the center of the western hemisphere, is certainly critical — but many of the other ports involved in the deal are equally so. For example, this deal would include a port inside the Malacca Strait, the only direct maritime pathway between the Indian and Pacific Oceans. It sees 90,000 ships and $3.5 trillion worth of global trade every year. Hutchison is also looking to sell five ports that it owns on both sides of the Suez Canal, the preferred maritime commercial route between the Asian and European markets. About 12% of global trade, $1 trillion a year, passes through Suez. As China's purchases of sanctioned Iranian oil draw greater US scrutiny, Hutchison's four ports on the southern side of the Strait of Hormuz are also critical. Nearly all Iranian oil must pass through the strait, along with oil and gas from Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iraq, Kuwait and Qatar. In Europe, Hutchison controls 13 ports that act as a key entry point for Chinese goods into the European Union. The original deal would reduce China's port foothold on the continent — and the geopolitical influence that comes with it. Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Like all major commercial deals, this one is complicated. Apart from the two Panama Canal ports, BlackRock would retain 20% ownership of the remaining facilities; its partner, Europe-based Mediterranean Shipping Corp., would control 70%, with Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund owning the rest. Meanwhile, China's power in global shipping is massive. China produces 95% of world shipping containers and all of the refrigerated ones. Ports around the world are plugged into China's logistical software platform, LOGINK, which tracks sensitive trade, market, maritime and passenger data. Huawei's 'Smart Port' 5G telecommunication towers provide Wi-Fi — and ready surveillance capacity — at ports worldwide. A Chinese state-owned company makes more than 70% of the world's ship-to-shore cranes (and 80% of the cranes used in America) — a major risk, according to the House Homeland Security Committee, which has alleged those cranes may be engaging in covert surveillance on behalf of the CCP. Adding state-owned COSCO to ports deal would give the CCP the power to veto any attempts to replace Huawei towers, LOGINK systems, Chinese cranes or other tools that may already be spying on behalf of the state. With BlackRock's minority interest in the vast bulk of these ports, replacing a private Chinese company with a state-owned one is even worse for the United States than the status quo. Breaking China's maritime monopoly is urgent. At the same time, America's economic leverage has never been higher. As Beijing trumps up patently absurd anti-monopoly investigations to stall or scuttle the BlackRock-MSC deal, the United States should Trump right back. He must make the choice clear: Access to American markets cannot continue unless Beijing releases its maritime monopoly. Elaine Dezenski heads the Center on Economic and Financial Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Susan Soh is a research associate.
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
John Thune says recess appointments are ‘on the table' as battle for Trump confirmations drags on
WASHINGTON — Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) on Thursday floated allowing for recess appointments to speed up confirming a backlog of 161 administration officials tapped by President Trump. 'I think everything is on the table,' Thune told reporters, adding that alternatives — including limiting debate time or changing other procedural rules — 'make more sense.' The Senate has confirmed just 115 appointees, leading some members of the Republican conference like Mike Lee of Utah to call for a cancellation of the August recess to ram through the rest. Advertisement 5 Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) on Thursday floated allowing for recess appointments to speed up confirming a backlog of 161 administration officials tapped by President Trump. Mattie Neretin – CNP for NY Post But the recess appointments approach — which lets Trump unilaterally install nominees with both chambers of Congress out of session — is likely to run into obstacles given the need to clear a threshold of 50 Republican votes. It's a tough task given public opposition by a handful of senators in the conference and their 53-47 majority in the chamber. Advertisement House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and his conference would also have to OK the adjournment of their chamber, along with the Senate's, to bypass so-called 'pro forma' sessions that can halt the procedure. 5 Neither Trump nor former President Joe Biden made any appointments during a recess in their previous terms. Getty Images Neither Trump nor former President Joe Biden made any appointments during a recess in their previous terms. Former Presidents Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, however, made dozens of them. In an exclusive interview with The Post Wednesday, Thune said 'at some point' the Senate will have to change the nominations process. Advertisement The holdup has largely been driven by Democrats' opposition to the simple voice vote, which was the standard for confirming typical nominations since the 1990s, Thune added. 5 The Senate has confirmed just 115 appointees, leading some members of the Republican conference like Mike Lee of Utah to call for a cancellation of the August recess to ram through the rest. AP 'Going back multiple administrations, both Democrats and Republicans, as recently as Bill Clinton, 98% of all the noms considered were handled either by voice [vote] or UC [unanimous consent] and it's just deteriorated over time to where Trump's, you know, we're at zero here,' he noted. 'It's got to be fixed.' Senate Republicans have discussed eliminating the cloture vote, shortening debate time for nominees down to just two hours or voting on a group of noms in a block after they advance out of committee. Advertisement 'This is not sustainable, and it, it certainly hamstrings, I think, the functioning of our government in a way that's really detrimental to the country,' Thune claimed, saying he had been negotiating with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for potential handshake agreements. 5 Thune has been negotiating with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for potential handshake agreements. Getty Images Some of those have involved Democratic slots on the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission that have yet to be filled. Others include prosecutorial positions such as the Southern District of New York US attorney, which is currently occupied in an acting capacity by Jay Clayton, who chaired the Securities and Exchange Commission under Trump's first administration from 2017 to 2020. 5 'Schumer, he's got folks over there who keep approaching members on our side about wanting to make a deal on noms, but he's not having it,' Thune added. Mattie Neretin – CNP for NY Post 'They want him as US attorney for the Southern District — I'd figure out a way to make a deal, and I think there are things you can trade,' Thune said, 'That's the other part of this that, you know, you've got to give us trade bait.' 'Schumer, he's got folks over there who keep approaching members on our side about wanting to make a deal on noms, but he's not having it,' he added.
Axios
a few seconds ago
- Axios
Musk's erratic June included a $10 million peace offering
Elon Musk contributed $10 million to congressional Republicans just days after his public blowup with President Trump, an indication the tech billionaire was looking to make peace with the White House. But Musk reversed course less than two weeks later, when he called for the creation of a third party. Why it matters: Musk's donations, and his ensuing about-face, underscores his erratic relationship with the president since leaving the administration in late May. The contributions were made public on Thursday in campaign finance disclosures from the pro-GOP Senate Leadership Fund and Congressional Leadership Fund super PACs. Here's how the Trump-Musk timeline breaks down. May 27: Musk noted he was "disappointed" with Trump's "big, beautiful bill," saying it would increase the budget deficit and undermine DOGE. May 28: Musk officially left his role as head of DOGE, saying on Twitter that he would "like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending," June 5: Musk attacked Trum p over the "big, beautiful bill," called for his impeachment, and asserted without evidence that the president is included in the Jeffrey Epstein files. June 6: Musk had a phone call with Vice President Vance and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles with an eye toward making amends. June 7: Musk deleted his posts from June 5 savaging Trump. June 9: Musk spoke by phone with Trump. June 11: Musk posted that he "went too far" in his posts attacking Trump. June 27: Musk gave contributions of $5 million each to the Senate Leadership Fund and Congressional Leadership Fund. June 30: Musk threatened to form a third party called the America Party if Congress passed the "big, beautiful bill." July 5: Musk said he formed the America Party "to give you back your freedom." Zoom out: Musk also contributed more than $45 million to America PAC over the first six months of 2025, new disclosure reports showed.
