What do you think?
Rate this book
Running from Office: Why Young Americans Are Turned Off to Politics
The past two decades of politics in Washington have seen increased partisanship, prolonged stalemates, and numerous scandals. For today's teenagers and young adults, years of ineffective and inefficient political leadership have completely eroded any sense that politicians or government have the ability to do good or effect positive change. Worse, the mean-spirited, dysfunctional political system that has come to characterize American politics has turned young people off to the idea of running for office. With more than 500,000 elected positions in the United States, what will happen when this generation is expected to take the reins of political power?
Through an original, national survey of more than 4,000 high school and college students, as well as more than 100 in-depth interviews, Jennifer L. Lawless and Richard L. Fox find that young Americans feel completely alienated from contemporary politics and express little ambition or aspiration to run for office in the future. The overwhelming majority see nothing particularly noble about those currently in office, viewing most as dishonest, self-interested, and disinterested in helping their constituents. These young people want to improve their communities and enact change in the world; but they don't think politics is the way to achieve these goals. In fact, they look disdainfully upon the prospects of growing up to be a mayor, governor, senator, or even president of the United States. Running from Office explores young people's opinions about contemporary politics and their political ambition (or lack of it). The book paints a political profile of the next generation that should sound alarm bells about the long-term, deeply embedded damage contemporary politics has wrought on U.S. democracy and its youngest citizens.
As disheartening as their conclusions sound, Lawless and Fox end with practical suggestions for how new technologies, national service programs, and well-strategized public service campaigns could generate political ambition in young people. Today's high school and college students care deeply about improving the future, and it's not too late to ensure that they view running for office as an effective way to do so.
Through an original, national survey of more than 4,000 high school and college students, as well as more than 100 in-depth interviews, Jennifer L. Lawless and Richard L. Fox find that young Americans feel completely alienated from contemporary politics and express little ambition or aspiration to run for office in the future. The overwhelming majority see nothing particularly noble about those currently in office, viewing most as dishonest, self-interested, and disinterested in helping their constituents. These young people want to improve their communities and enact change in the world; but they don't think politics is the way to achieve these goals. In fact, they look disdainfully upon the prospects of growing up to be a mayor, governor, senator, or even president of the United States. Running from Office explores young people's opinions about contemporary politics and their political ambition (or lack of it). The book paints a political profile of the next generation that should sound alarm bells about the long-term, deeply embedded damage contemporary politics has wrought on U.S. democracy and its youngest citizens.
As disheartening as their conclusions sound, Lawless and Fox end with practical suggestions for how new technologies, national service programs, and well-strategized public service campaigns could generate political ambition in young people. Today's high school and college students care deeply about improving the future, and it's not too late to ensure that they view running for office as an effective way to do so.
228 pages, Hardcover
First published July 1, 2015
4 people are currently reading
169 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
August 7, 2019
An important topic and one I think all Americans should be concerned about, but I found the book boring and drawn out (thankfully, it is still a pretty quick read). Lots of statistics and data with not as many in-depth and substantive discussions. Plus, the recommendations at the end felt rushed and also too big for one person to tackle. I wish the authors had provided some small, tangible actions for people to do instead of making really big, expensive suggestions.
July 23, 2017
Evidence heavy yet concise work about young people and their attitudes towards politics.
April 8, 2020
The research was fantastic and worth reading. I feel like it might be already outdated, which is the nature of political research these days.
September 24, 2016
This is such a terrible book. I took a high school probability and statistics class and I genuinely feel that I could have written a better report on the survey that the authors conducted than they did. In the first part, their survey seems to have consisted of interviews with follow-up questions. I have no idea how "leading" their questions were or what the circumstances surrounding their choosing students to interview was (did they make sure to have a random sample?), but that was information they definitely should have included.
There were also blatantly idiotic statements at several places. For example, p. 62, "Most parents' distaste for political discussion within the typical household and young people's political exposure. This has a strong and direct influence on interest in running for office […] 22 percent of those who talk about politics with a parent at least a few times a week have considered running for office. Only 6 percent of people who do not talk about politics with a parent at least a few times a week have thought about running." Can you see the blatant flaw in this reasoning? On the LSAT this is one of the most common reasoning flaws - assuming that correlation is the same thing as causation. Maybe children who are already more interested in politics bring it up in discussion with their parents a few times a week, rather than the parents initiating. Or maybe there is a third factor, such as geographic location (such as if this 22 percent of students lived in Washington DC, for example), that is causing both more discussion of politics AND more interest in a political career.
tldr; this book draws conclusions that should not be drawn from a questionable survey the authors conducted. In addition, it is boring. Don't read.
There were also blatantly idiotic statements at several places. For example, p. 62, "Most parents' distaste for political discussion within the typical household and young people's political exposure. This has a strong and direct influence on interest in running for office […] 22 percent of those who talk about politics with a parent at least a few times a week have considered running for office. Only 6 percent of people who do not talk about politics with a parent at least a few times a week have thought about running." Can you see the blatant flaw in this reasoning? On the LSAT this is one of the most common reasoning flaws - assuming that correlation is the same thing as causation. Maybe children who are already more interested in politics bring it up in discussion with their parents a few times a week, rather than the parents initiating. Or maybe there is a third factor, such as geographic location (such as if this 22 percent of students lived in Washington DC, for example), that is causing both more discussion of politics AND more interest in a political career.
tldr; this book draws conclusions that should not be drawn from a questionable survey the authors conducted. In addition, it is boring. Don't read.
January 6, 2017
This book was an incredible disappointment. The survey the entire book is based around, though pretty flawed, may serve as a solid datapoint in a larger investigation of this subject going forward, but it offers very little value to readers today. Certainly not an entire book's worth.
I was really expecting a dense and interesting interrogation of the factors that have led to a decline in civic participation from young people. How does a changing media landscape affect this generation? What about urbanization? Are kids' political beliefs incompatible with current systems of government? Instead Running from Office gives you extremely vague answers to inconsequential questions. I now know how many kids discuss politics at the dinner table with their parents.
The book is just not as ambitious as its title and description suggest, and it's prescriptions are nauseatingly facile. Empower young women/Gamify politics/Appeal to millenials' self-interest. Come on.
Running from Office is a 20 page article stretched out to over 200 because the title and subject matter will draw people like me into picking it up. It was a breezy enough read. I'm not in physical pain from having read the book, but I'm sure Jennifer Lawless has enough commentary pieces and interviews out there readily available for free. You're not missing anything by skipping this book.
I was really expecting a dense and interesting interrogation of the factors that have led to a decline in civic participation from young people. How does a changing media landscape affect this generation? What about urbanization? Are kids' political beliefs incompatible with current systems of government? Instead Running from Office gives you extremely vague answers to inconsequential questions. I now know how many kids discuss politics at the dinner table with their parents.
The book is just not as ambitious as its title and description suggest, and it's prescriptions are nauseatingly facile. Empower young women/Gamify politics/Appeal to millenials' self-interest. Come on.
Running from Office is a 20 page article stretched out to over 200 because the title and subject matter will draw people like me into picking it up. It was a breezy enough read. I'm not in physical pain from having read the book, but I'm sure Jennifer Lawless has enough commentary pieces and interviews out there readily available for free. You're not missing anything by skipping this book.
June 2, 2016
The book is, sadly, facile and simplistic.
The main point that the authors miss is that many modern Republican office holders, especially since the rise of the Tea Party, are impervious to the other analysis presented here.
1. The likes of Ted Cruz defines their "base" more narrowly, and thus don't care about general ratings. Add this to gerrymandering of House districts (Cruz as a Senator is unaffected) and vote suppression efforts and the issue is only compounded.
2. Many of these Tea Party types actually want voters to hate government that much that strident opposition is part of the game plan. They even want many voters to get turned off enough to the whole process that they eventually, fatalistically, accept such obstructionism.
And, the book doesn't delve into that.
Beyond that, while it explores while vs minority and male vs female attitudes toward politics and running for office, related to this, it doesn't explore GOP vs Democrat or conservative vs. liberal.
The book as stands should have been condensed into an essay.
The main point that the authors miss is that many modern Republican office holders, especially since the rise of the Tea Party, are impervious to the other analysis presented here.
1. The likes of Ted Cruz defines their "base" more narrowly, and thus don't care about general ratings. Add this to gerrymandering of House districts (Cruz as a Senator is unaffected) and vote suppression efforts and the issue is only compounded.
2. Many of these Tea Party types actually want voters to hate government that much that strident opposition is part of the game plan. They even want many voters to get turned off enough to the whole process that they eventually, fatalistically, accept such obstructionism.
And, the book doesn't delve into that.
Beyond that, while it explores while vs minority and male vs female attitudes toward politics and running for office, related to this, it doesn't explore GOP vs Democrat or conservative vs. liberal.
The book as stands should have been condensed into an essay.
February 3, 2017
I did not give this book the time it deserves, but here are some takeaways:
Young people want to help others but they do not see a path to do this by following politics
Young people have a higher likelyhood of being interested in politics if politics are discussed at home regularly, if they get encouraged to run for office, and if they indeed then do this early on in school-related settings.
High school girls and boys see themselves equally able to get politically involved. College women no longer see themselves as willing and able as college men to run for any office.
Possible solutions offered by the book to get more young people involved as we need them in droves: make political computer games, like SimCity or such, to reach young people where they are. Make politics easily and reliably available at their fingertips on their mobile devices. Make it easier to join political life through something similar to the PeaceCorps or AmeriCorps. Make politics more relevant for college students by integrating it into the curriculum in neutral ways.
Young people want to help others but they do not see a path to do this by following politics
Young people have a higher likelyhood of being interested in politics if politics are discussed at home regularly, if they get encouraged to run for office, and if they indeed then do this early on in school-related settings.
High school girls and boys see themselves equally able to get politically involved. College women no longer see themselves as willing and able as college men to run for any office.
Possible solutions offered by the book to get more young people involved as we need them in droves: make political computer games, like SimCity or such, to reach young people where they are. Make politics easily and reliably available at their fingertips on their mobile devices. Make it easier to join political life through something similar to the PeaceCorps or AmeriCorps. Make politics more relevant for college students by integrating it into the curriculum in neutral ways.
November 17, 2015
this was essentially an extended explanation of a study/survey, so not quite what i was expecting, but i think there were some compelling ideas on how to get young people interested in political office.
November 21, 2015
An important topic but reads like an extended thesis. The suggestions at the end were interesting, especially the call to engage college students in the political process as much as we do high school students. But it took a while to get there.
August 11, 2015
Really just skimmed through this; got the gist pretty quickly...important topic, but could have been equally provided in a article.
December 16, 2015
Pretty good. Pretty much just a book of statistics.
June 25, 2016
This was a decent read. I lost interest in the middle, but most enjoyed the points in the end.
November 11, 2016
In light of what has happened, this is an important work. Not altogether deeply informative, but still important.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews