A recent poll indicates that Gen Z might lean towards more interventionist and aggressive foreign policy views compared to previous generations. However, the data behind this study suggests a more nuanced picture than the headlines imply.
This survey sparked a column in the Washington Post titled “How Young MAGA Voters View America’s Role in the World,” by Mark Thiessen, a contributor to Fox News and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. In his piece, Thiessen argues that young MAGA voters desire a leading role for America globally, preferring engagement internationally over isolation, specifically regarding situations in Ukraine, Iran, and Taiwan.
Thiessen goes on to state that isolationist views are misaligned with Trump’s America First movement, suggesting that Gen Z conservatives lack support. Yet, the research he cites is based on shaky foundations.
A survey by the Ronald Reagan Institute found that many self-identified MAGA voters under 30 largely back an interventionist foreign policy. The poll combined responses from both landlines and cell phones and targeted a significant number of younger MAGA supporters.
However, using landlines in a survey about Gen Z raises questions about who the pollers actually reached. It’s unclear if the responses accurately represent the younger, digital-savvy conservative coalition the study aims to inform.
The term “MAGA” itself is often more associated with older voters, not the youth. Interestingly, the Republican victories in 2024 resulted not just from MAGA voters but also from a coalition of Libertarians, separatists, “MAHA” supporters, and everyday Americans who simply wanted lower costs and safer communities.
Additionally, while the study claims to debunk the notion that young conservatives are mainly isolationists, it only surveyed a modest group of 331 under-30 MAGA Republicans.
A Republican consultant, who remained anonymous for candidness, noted that such a small sample size doesn’t yield broadly applicable insights. This poll, they remarked, appears to stand out in its uniqueness compared to recent ones.
In contrast to this survey, other polls among young voters reveal different sentiments regarding foreign policy. For example, a Pew Research survey showed that 57% of Republicans aged 18 to 49 held negative perspectives on Israel. This contrasts with the Reagan Institute’s report, which claimed 63% of young MAGA voters support Israel’s security as critical for U.S. safety.
The New York Times also reported that many Republicans from Gen Z and Millennials expressed disapproval of the Iranian conflict and desire to reshape their party’s foreign policy direction. Ryan Gardusky, a conservative consultant, pointed out that young Republicans initially supported Trump to drive change.
Despite questionable methods, Thiessen’s column and the Reagan Institute study appeared to overlook critical data that contradicted their characterization of an emerging, interventionist conservative faction.
The survey included a question about whether respondents believed that the U.S. would benefit more by withdrawing from international involvement to focus on domestic issues. Seventy-two percent of young MAGA participants agreed with this viewpoint, compared to 64% of MAGA voters overall.
Younger MAGA respondents were also less likely to prioritize Israel’s security in U.S. interests (63% vs. 80% of all MAGA voters) and less concerned about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons (75% vs. 89%). In fact, younger voters often cared less about U.S. participation in NATO and were more open to negotiating issues with Iran.
Notably, a significant portion—62%—of young MAGA respondents believed that U.S. international involvement is generally beneficial, which is considerably lower than the 81% among all MAGA voters. Additionally, they were less inclined to support military aid to Israel, with only 60% in favor compared to 73% overall.
Overall, the data suggests a different narrative than emphasized by Thiessen and the Reagan Institute. Even within a survey primarily focused on self-identified MAGA voters, younger respondents appeared less hawkish than their older counterparts.
This doesn’t necessarily classify young conservatives as strict isolationists, but it contradicts the assertion that Gen Z is eager to adopt the established neoconservative foreign policy framework.
While there are certainly varying opinions among Republicans, claiming that young MAGA supporters blindly emulate past neoconservative trends doesn’t hold up under scrutiny from the survey data.
Gardusky emphasized that studies like this, influenced by neoconservative perspectives, might suggest that reviving Ronald Reagan’s policies is the key to future success. However, he argues that such approaches, characterized by aggression, are detrimental to future generations.
The Kohler reached out to Thiessen for insights regarding his column but did not receive a reply.
