Ever noticed how people in their thirties or even forties still get called “kids” in some circles? That’s exactly what happened when Senator J.D. Vance referred to members of the Young Republicans as “kids,” even though plenty of them are well past college age. It raises a simple but interesting question: Is this just a slip of the tongue, or is there more going on with how we use age-based labels in politics?

Why Are Adults in Politics Still Called “Kids”?

J.D. Vance isn’t the first to use the word “kids” when talking about younger members of a political group, but it feels odd when those “kids” might be professionals with mortgages and families. In many organizations—especially political ones—terms like “young,” “junior,” or “youth wing” stick around long after most members have graduated from their twenties.

There are a few reasons this happens:

• Historical inertia: The name “Young Republicans” has been around since the 1850s, so the term sticks even as membership ages up.
• Relative perspective: To some senior politicians, anyone under 50 might seem like a kid!
• Group identity: The label can be a point of pride or belonging, even if it doesn’t match members’ actual ages.
• Cultural habits: American culture often uses “kid” playfully or affectionately for adults who are newer to a scene.

Yet, when someone like J.D. Vance—a sitting U.S. Senator—uses the term publicly, it can feel dismissive to some and harmless to others.

The Impact of Language on Political Identity

Words matter in politics. Calling grown adults “kids” can shape how groups see themselves and how others see them. Some might laugh it off as harmless banter, but others worry it might undermine credibility or make the group seem less serious.

For example, according to NPR, labels and generational language can affect how young people engage with politics and how they’re perceived by older voters. When older politicians refer to younger members as “kids,” it could unintentionally reinforce a divide or suggest that newer voices aren’t yet ready to lead.

Does Age Still Define Political Groups?

The term “Young Republican” used to mean college students or twenty-somethings dipping their toes into politics. Now that the average age is creeping upward, does the name still make sense? Some see it as a quirky tradition—like calling the Boy Scouts “boys” well into their teens—while others think it’s time for an update.

Here’s a quick look at why these labels stick:

• Tradition: The group’s identity is tied to its original name.
• Networking: “Young” chapters often offer different events than the main party.
• Recruitment: The name can be appealing to new or first-time political participants.

But as more people in their thirties and forties stay involved, these groups start to look less like youth wings and more like full-fledged political organizations.

An Anecdote From the Political Scene

At a state convention a few years ago, a group of “Young Democrats” sat discussing policy proposals over coffee. One member joked about being the “oldest young person in the room” at age 38. Everyone laughed, but it was clear that the line between youth and adulthood in politics isn’t as sharp as the group names suggest. For many, staying in these groups is less about age and more about a shared sense of energy—and maybe a little nostalgia.

Should We Rethink Political Labels?

This isn’t just a Republican thing—it happens across political parties and organizations worldwide. Tradition can be comforting, but it can also be confusing when the label doesn’t match reality. There’s no rule that says a group has to change its name once members hit a certain age, but language evolves with society.

Some experts argue that updating group names could help attract more diverse members and reflect the real face of modern politics (see Pew Research). Others say the familiarity of names like “Young Republicans” brings people together across generations.

Final Thoughts: What’s in a Name?

So, does it really matter if J.D. Vance calls Young Republicans “kids,” even when they’re well into their thirties or forties? Maybe it’s just an old habit—or maybe it’s time for political groups to rethink how they talk about age.

What do you think? Do these labels reflect reality or hold groups back? Would changing them make any difference—or does tradition trump accuracy?