President Donald Trump has made fossil fuel expansion a central part of his second-term agenda, but polling suggests most Americans still support action on climate change and continue to favor clean energy over more oil, gas and coal.
The disconnect is becoming more visible as national political attention shifts away from climate policy, even while extreme heat, wildfire smoke, droughts, storms and rising insurance costs continue affecting communities across the country.
Trump has repeatedly promoted a “drill, baby, drill” approach to energy policy and has moved to roll back climate rules introduced under President Joe Biden. His administration has also targeted renewable energy projects and directed new support toward coal-fired power plants. Trump has dismissed clean energy as a costly burden and has argued that expanding fossil fuel production will lower prices and strengthen the economy.
Yet recent polling from Yale and George Mason University shows that many Americans do not share that view. A large majority of registered voters support federal investment in renewable energy research, regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant and transitioning the U.S. economy toward cleaner energy over time.
TRENDING TODAY
The same polling suggests that support for increasing fossil fuel use is relatively limited. Only a small share of voters say they would support a candidate specifically because that candidate wants to expand fossil fuel use, while far more voters support candidates who favor clean energy or lower emissions.
Anthony Leiserowitz, director of Yale’s climate communication program, has argued that the 2024 election should not be interpreted as a national rejection of climate policy. He said Americans still believe climate change is happening, still worry about it and still support action, even if other issues have dominated the news.
One challenge, experts say, is that climate change has become less visible in the media and in political messaging. Major newsrooms have reduced climate coverage or cut climate reporting positions, while wars, inflation, immigration and election fights have taken more attention. That has created what some researchers call a “climate silence,” where public concern remains high but public discussion declines.
The result is a strange political gap. Americans continue to experience climate-related costs, but the issue is not always framed as part of daily economic pressure. Heat waves can increase electricity bills. Wildfire smoke can worsen health problems. Storms and flooding can raise insurance premiums. Droughts can affect food prices. But many voters may not immediately connect those costs to climate policy.
Recent research has found that climate impacts are already adding hundreds of dollars a year to household expenses in many parts of the country. In some vulnerable areas, including parts of California, Louisiana and Florida, those costs can be even higher.
That economic connection may become more important as both parties prepare for future elections. Democrats have struggled to decide how loudly to campaign on climate after Biden’s climate policies became politically vulnerable. Some strategists worry that clean-energy messaging does not win elections, while climate advocates argue that the public is more supportive than politicians assume.
Republicans, meanwhile, have leaned into fossil fuels as part of a broader energy-independence message. But polling suggests that even many conservative voters are not strongly committed to reducing renewable energy. In states such as Texas, clean energy has grown rapidly because wind and solar can be profitable and useful for the power grid, even when local politicians oppose national climate policy.
The debate is no longer only about climate science. It is also about household costs, energy reliability, jobs, health and whether the U.S. wants to compete in the global clean-energy economy.
For now, Trump’s fossil fuel agenda has shifted federal policy sharply away from climate action. But public opinion remains more complicated. Americans may not always rank climate change as their top voting issue, yet most still support many policies designed to reduce pollution and expand clean energy.
That means the politics of climate are quieter than before, but not settled.
Why It Matters
The polling matters because it challenges the idea that Trump’s fossil fuel agenda reflects the full public mood. Many Americans remain worried about climate change and support clean energy, even as political leaders and media outlets talk about it less.
It also matters because climate costs are becoming household costs. Insurance, health expenses, electricity bills, food prices and disaster recovery are all increasingly tied to extreme weather and long-term climate risk.
What Comes Next
The next major test will be whether Democrats and climate groups decide to talk more directly about the economic costs of climate change and the benefits of clean energy.
The Trump administration is expected to continue pushing fossil fuel production and weakening climate rules, while courts, states and private investors may determine how far that agenda can go.
A recent Searchlight Institute poll found that voters view solar panels, wind turbines and natural gas more favorably than coal and nuclear energy.
NEW Economist/YouGov Jun 13-15
% who approve | disapprove of Donald Trump
U.S. adult citizens 39% | 56% (-17)
Last week 35% | 60% (-25)
Start of term 49% | 43% (+6)Dem 6% | 92%
Ind 25% | 64%
Rep 85% | 13%18-29: 35% | 59%
65+: 42% | 52%
(Link in reply) pic.twitter.com/Q3SOp4RQuA— YouGov America (@YouGovAmerica) June 16, 2026
