Rise in number of American LGBTQ+ candidates for office beginning in 2018
The "rainbow wave" was a phrase coined in 2018 to describe the unparalleled number of openly LGBTQ+ candidates running for political office in the United States that year. The rainbow wave began during the 2018 U.S. midterm elections when over 400 LGBTQ+ candidates ran for office and a record-breaking 244 were elected.
The following year, in the 2019 elections, 382 openly LGBTQ+ candidates ran for public office and 200 made it on the ballot, of which 170 won. In the 2020 elections, over 1,000 LGBTQ+ people ran for office and 734 LGBTQ+ candidates secured a spot on the ballot. Of these candidates, 334 won. The 2021 elections had the largest number of LGBTQ+ candidates in any U.S. off-year election; there were 430 LGBTQ+ candidates, of which 184 were elected. 
The 2022 elections represented the biggest rainbow wave in U.S. history, as 1,065 LGBTQ+ candidates ran for office and 436 were elected. The 2022 U.S. elections were also the first time that LGBTQ+ candidates appeared on the ballot across all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Lesbian and gay issues have been specially considered in United States elections since 1974, when the first two openly gay politicians were elected, Kathy Kozachenko and Elaine Noble, and the first anti-homosexual measure appeared on the ballot in Colorado. During the 1970s through to the 2010s, LGBTQ+ political considerations and advances shifted and expanded. In the late 1990s through the 2000s, there was a focus on gay marriage. The 2015 Supreme Court case "Obergefell v. Hodges" solidified the constitutional right to same-sex marriage. Starting from the mid-2010s and continuing through the present day, there has been a focus on transgender rights and discrimination.
As of 2023, there are 1,175 openly-LGBTQ+ elected officials in the United States, more than ever before. 
There is little research on voter attitudes towards and the impacts of LGBTQ+ candidates. One study found that voters significantly penalize lesbian, gay, and transgender candidates, with transgender candidates facing a significantly higher penalty than their lesbian and gay counterparts. The level of voter scrutiny against these candidates varied by partisanship, political ideology, religion, and voters' relationships with LGBT people, or lack thereof. The study attributed these biases most significantly to the worry of their "electability," along with outright prejudice and the worry that the candidates were too liberal. Regarding the impacts of these candidates, LGBTQ+ representation in political office has been found to correlate strongly with the proposal and passage of pro-LGBTQ and equal rights legislation. It has also been found to positively influence societal perceptions of the LGBTQ+ community and their equal rights at large.
History of LGBTQ+ politics and representation in office.
Overview of LGBTQ+ politics (1970s–present).
Lesbian and gay issues were first given special consideration in the 1974 United States elections. During this cycle, alongside the election of the first two openly gay politicians, the first anti-homosexual measure was put on a ballot. The measure was passed in Colorado through referendum, removing sexual orientation as a protected category from discrimination in Boulder's Human Rights Ordinance. In the following 30 years, there were many similar anti-gay initiatives promoted by the religious right. At the same time, there were nearly 150 state and local initiatives and referenda for gay civil rights.
Overall, LGBTQ+ political advances spanned and shifted focus from the 1970s through the 2010s. In the 1970s, LGBTQ+ political considerations focused on adding sexual orientation as a protected category to anti-discrimination ordinances. These measures faced backlash initiatives and referenda from the religious right. The 1970s also centered on protecting gay teachers in schools with varying levels of success. 
In the 1980s and 1990s, the anti-LGBTQ+ movement intensified, most prominently through proposed amendments that would repeal and ban the anti-discrimination ordinances protecting lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Ultimately, however, the 1996 Supreme Court case "Romer v. Evans" ruled these amendments unconstitutional on the grounds of not satisfying the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
In the late 1990s through the 2000s, pro-LGBTQ and anti-LGBTQ movements focused on same-sex unions and marriages. During this time, bans on same-sex marriage spread throughout the United States. The year 2012 marked a shift in these anti-gay marriage attitudes, when the first states (Maine, Maryland, and Washington) legalized same-sex marriage through popular vote. In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court Case "Obergefell v. Hodges" effectively legalized marriage equality nationwide on the grounds of the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
In the mid-2010s, transgender rights and discrimination (in employment, housing, and other sectors) became the focus of both the religious right and pro-LGBTQ+ movement. As of 2023, Republicans are proposing and supporting hundreds of pieces of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation across the country. According to the ACLU, there are over 450 anti-LGBTQ+ bills in the United States for the 2023 legislative session, targeting issues such as gender-affirming healthcare, gender identity and sexuality in public school education. A "PBS News Hour", "NPR", and Marist Poll showed increasing support for these anti-LGBTQ+ laws. For example, since 2021, there has been a 15% increase (from 28% to 43% of Americans) in support of laws banning gender-affirming medical care for minors.
First openly LGBTQ+ candidates and elects.
Drag queen and activist José Sarria became the first openly gay person to run for public office in the United States when he ran for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1961. Kathy Kozachenko was elected to the Ann Arbor, Michigan City Council in 1974, becoming the first openly gay and lesbian politician in the United States. Shortly after, also in 1974, Elaine Noble became the first openly gay person elected to a state legislature, when she was elected to the Massachusetts General Assembly as a representative for Boston's Back Bay neighborhood.
In 1977, pioneering gay rights activist Harvey Milk became one of the first openly LGBTQ+ elected politicians in the United States and the first LGBTQ+ politician in California when he was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Gerry Studds became the first openly-LGBTQ+ Member of the U.S. Congress when he came out while in office in 1983. After coming out, he was reelected in 1984. Since these and other LGBTQ+ individuals became the frontrunners of LGBTQ+ representation in politics, hundreds of openly LGBTQ+ individuals have run and been elected to public office in the United States.
Transgender representation has moved more slowly. Since at least the 1990s, transgender candidates have run for office, but often not openly. In 2012, Stacie-Marie Laughton became the first openly transgender lawmaker elected in the United States when she was elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives, but resigned before taking office. Danica Roem ultimately became the first openly-transgender state legislator when she was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2017.
Current representation of LGBTQ+ people in political office.
There are currently more openly-LGBTQ+ elected officials in local, state, and national legislatures than ever before. As of April 2, 2023, there are 1,175 openly-LGBTQ+ elected officials in the United States, an increase from 698 five years ago. Of all elected officials nationwide, 0.23% are openly LGBTQ+. There are 13 openly-LGBTQ+ members of the United States Congress compared to 10 in 2019. There are 228 openly-LGBTQ+ state legislators, an increase of 55% since 2019, and 721 local LGBTQ+ officials, an increase of 83% since 2019. There are three governors, 59 mayors, and 137 officials at the judicial level who are openly-LGBTQ+. Of the 1,175 openly LGBTQ+ elected officials, 887 (75%) are Democrats, 34 are Republicans (3%), 28 are independent (2%), and 58 are from another party (5%). 
The composition of LGBTQ+ elected officials is also increasingly more diverse. Racially, the number of LGBTQ+ politicians of color has increased from 22% of all LGBTQ+ elected officials in 2019 to 32% in 2023, including a 186% increase in Black/African-American/Afro-Caribbean and a 116% increase in Latinx/Hispanic LGBTQ+ politicians since 2019. LGBTQ+ female elected officials saw a 60% increase, non-binary and gender non-confirming people a 300% increase, trans women a 173% increase, and trans men an 80% increase since 2019. Since 2019, queer, bisexual, and pansexual candidates have also increased by 200%.
Voter attitudes and electoral barriers for LGBTQ+ candidates.
There has been little formal research on voter attitudes towards LGBTQ+ candidates.
A 2021 study by political scientists Gabriele Magni and Andrew Reynolds investigated voter attitudes towards a candidate based on their sexual orientation and gender identity in advanced democracies. They found that the United States had the greatest voter penalties towards LGBT candidates of the three countries investigated (U.S., UK, and New Zealand). The researchers conducted surveys through a conjoint experiment of over 1,800 Americans to measure their attitudes toward candidate characteristics in a hypothetical election.
Overall, gay and lesbian candidates face a 6.7 percentage point penalty compared to their heterosexual counterparts while transgender candidates face an 11 percentage point penalty. The study also found that LGBTQ+ candidates of ethnic minorities face no further penalty, other than Black gay candidates who face an additional 3.6 percentage point penalty for their sexual orientation. Additionally, voters favor candidates with more political experience, which the researchers say disadvantages LGBTQ+ candidates because they are less likely to have this experience.
The study found that there is a wide variation in attitudes towards LGBT candidates based on different voter demographics. Partisanship was a clear indicator, as the penalty for gay candidates between Republican and Democratic voters differed by 8.4 percentage points. Republicans significantly penalized gay candidates by 14.8 percentage points.
Political ideology represents a stronger indicator of voter attitudes, as progressives did not penalize gay or lesbian candidates at all, while conservatives strongly penalized them by 17.2 percentage points. Moreover, people with LGBT family members or friends did not penalize gay candidates, and LGBT voters favor gay candidates by nine or 10 percentage points.
Nonreligious voters did not penalize gay candidates, but religious ones (those who regularly attended religious services) significantly penalized them by 12 percentage points.
Transgender candidates were more strongly penalized across all of the voter subgroups. The differences between the subgroups were less distinct for transgender candidates. Progressives and LGBT voters represent the only groups who did not penalize transgender candidates and even sometimes favored them, while conservatives significantly penalized them by 16 to 18 percentage points. Democrats penalized transgender candidates by six percentage points, while Republicans penalized them by 19 percentage points. Voters with LGBT friends and family penalized transgender candidates by five percentage points. Religious voters penalize transgender candidates by the highest margin (18 percentage points).
The study also looked at the reasons for these voter biases. They explained that the primary biases were explained by outright prejudice, electability, and perceptions of the candidates as liberal. The most prominent explanation for bias against gay and transgender candidates was the worry of electability, accounting for 52% and 57% of the voters' justifications for gay and transgender candidates respectively. Outright prejudice was responsible for 32% of the effects of voter bias, while perceptions of gay and transgender candidates as more liberal accounted for 9% of the concerns about gay candidates, and 6% for transgender candidates.
Rainbow waves (2018–2023).
2018 election rainbow wave.
The term "rainbow wave" was coined in the 2018 midterms, as a result of the unprecedented number of candidates and elects. During this cycle, there were over 600 openly LGBTQ+ candidates running for office, 432 on the ballot, and 244 winners. Twenty-two openly LGBTQ+ candidates ran for party seats in Congress, representing an increase of 340% since 2010. Close to 195 candidates ran for state legislatures across 43 states. Moreover, a record number of transgender women ran for office, including Democrat Christine Hallquist, the first transgender person to become a majority party's nominee for governor.
Of the 432 LGBTQ+ candidates on the ballot, 10 of 28 federal candidates were elected, and 26 of the 34 judicial candidates were elected. In the state legislature, 110 of 197 LGBTQ+ candidates were elected, while statewide, six of 11 were elected. On the local level, 80 of 142 candidates were elected and 10 of 16 LGBTQ+ mayoral candidates were elected.
Prior to the 2018 election, there were seven openly LGBTQ+ congresspeople (six House representatives and one senator), which increased to 10 after the election (eight House representatives and two senators). Additionally, in 2018, there were 119 openly LGBTQ+ state legislators, increasing to 148 after the election. Pre-election, seven states had never elected an LGBTQ+ candidate to their state legislatures, which decreased