Submitted by nfw22 t3_119ells in washingtondc
Whether true or not, to outsiders, DC is perceived to be a transient city (at least more so than other cities). One explanation I've heard for this is that with changing presidential administrations, staffers come and go for jobs.
I cannot track down the exact article I'm thinking of, but around four years ago I read an article in maybe WaPo or the Washingtonian about how the culture of DC changed during the Trump presidency. I am wondering how much truth there is to this perception, generally speaking. With administration changes (thinking particularly of ones that entail a new party taking the WH) is there a notable change that follows in terms of the types of people living in the city?
DC is not that big of a city, and given the high proportion of federal government employees in the District, I am wondering if there is a solid-enough core of DC "lifers" so that the changing demographics isn't noticeable, or is it still significant?
solidrecommendations t1_j9lr15y wrote
There are far more career federal employees than political appointees. So I don’t buy the idea there is a huge amount of noticeable turnover with administrations. A lot of young people come to work in DC as interns, for entry level jobs, etc., before moving on to other things. So there is a lot of churn in the 20s age group. There is less churn in the over 30s crowd but some people do move to the burbs when they have kids.
That said, I know lots of folks who’ve been here for a long time and have no plans to leave. So I think this is sort of a trope, though I would concede DC has more churn than a place like Charlotte, for example.