Kamala’s Honeymoon Over: Voters Don’t Believe Her Polling
August 06, 2024.png)
Key Takeaways
- Online discourse about Kamala Harris is predominantly negative, contradicting many recent polls which show strong support for her on the Democratic ticket.
- Harris's support base rallies around her as a defense against Trump, rather than affirmative endorsements of her policies.
- Sentiments are largely negative, reflecting widespread frustration and distrust in the political system. Blame is cast across political lines, with each side attributing the failures to the other's policies.
Our Methodology
Demographics
All Voters
Sample Size
96,500
Geographical Breakdown
National
Time Period
7 Days
MIG Reports leverages EyesOver technology, employing Advanced AI for precise analysis. This ensures unparalleled precision, setting a new standard. Find out more about the unique data pull for this article.
With several outlets publishing opinion polls on the presidential matchup of Donald Trump vs Kamala Harris, MIG Reports data shows American are skeptical. This skepticism is especially sharp toward traditional, or establishment, news and media outlets.
While perceptions of political polling's reliability vary greatly, a substantial portion of the public appears to distrust these polls. This skepticism stems from previous experiences where polls have failed to predict actual election outcomes accurately.
Currently, Kamala’s support base, while diverse, shows nuanced characteristics revealing both genuine admiration and reactive support spurred by political attacks. The overarching sentiment among Harris supporters online is a rallying around her in opposition to Trump. This "us versus them" mentality often fuels an online reactionary defense, rather than positive support or a nuanced understanding of policy issues.
Analysis of real-time conversations about Harris’s position on important voter issues betrays an underlying negativity that does not seem consistent with polling.
Border Security
Voter view of Vice President Kamala Harris and her failure at the U.S. border are negative, focusing on harsh criticisms for her policies. The primary sentiment is driven by frustration over her failure to manage immigration issues. People accuse her of being a key figure in allowing an extreme border crisis.
.png)
Discussion Highlights
- Increased Illegal Immigration: Critics cite Harris's role in allowing unchecked illegal immigration, alleging 10 million or more illegal entries. They lament the strain on social services and infrastructure.
- Border Wall and Security: There is significant discourse about Harris halting border wall construction and reversing previous policies, with anger over ending agreements like "Remain in Mexico.”
- Impact on Safety and Crime: Many believe increased illegal immigration has led to a rise in crime, including drug trafficking and violence, posing threats to community safety and national security.
- Economic Concerns: Critics accuse Harris policies of causing higher living costs, burdening taxpayers who feel they are supporting illegal immigrants through social services.
- Policy Stance: People view Harris as supporting radical policies, such as abolishing ICE and offering free healthcare to undocumented immigrants, which are massively unpopular.
While support for Harris on border issues is limited, her supporters claim her efforts have been limited to addressing migration's root causes and advocating for comprehensive immigration reform. They view her approach as balancing security with compassion and aligning with American humanitarian values.
Sentiment Trends
- Lack of Leadership: Many express dissatisfaction with Biden-Harris inaction, noting infrequent visits to the border and lack of communication with Border Patrol leaders.
- Legislative Failures: Critics claim her policies have not led to substantive border security reforms and have resulted in bureaucratic inefficiencies and legislative gridlock.
Border Czar Failures
Harris's role as "Border Czar" also garners widespread criticism, along with broader views of border security. Voters express dissatisfaction, accusing her of failing in her leadership position, allowing record illegal crossings and compromising national security. Critics directly link her oversight to increased crime, drug trafficking, and threats to public safety.
This negativity suggests a lack of confidence in her ability to solve critical problems or speak meaningfully to Americans about things they view as important. With border security consistently among the top three critical issues to voters, and Harris’s Border Czar role providing direct oversight, border security serves as a gauge of Kamala’s administrative competence—or lack thereof.
Discussion Highlights
- Negative Sentiment: People view Harris as exacerbating the border situation. They say she has allowed millions of illegal immigrants into the country, citing statistics to support claims of increased crossings and security risks.
- Policy Criticisms: Discussions use phrases like "decriminalized crossing," "funding for ICE," and "border patrol agents," and indicate disapproval for her lack of action.
- Lack of Positive Outcomes: Voters point out a lack of concrete, positive outcomes from Kamala's leadership. Critics often question her qualifications and effectiveness in managing important issues.
.png)
International Unrest
A huge focus also places heavy negativity on international security dynamics. Voters on both sides disapprove of Harris’s stance on Israel and Palestine, and her broader foreign policy. The most frequently discussed issues involve her support for Israel, approaches to the ongoing conflict in Gaza, and her strategies for managing threats posed by Iran and its proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas.
.png)
Discussion Highlights
- Us vs. Them: Supporters rally around Harris as the savior from a potential second Trump term, touting her resilience and ability to tackle complex policy issues.
- Support for Israel: Harris’s strong Israel support gains approval, especially with those who see Israel as a critical ally. However, pro-Palestine Democrats express dissatisfaction.
- Bipartisan Unhappiness: Harris's advocacy for increased humanitarian aid to Gaza does not go far enough for pro-Palestine voters, while her support for Israel does not go far enough for pro-Israel voters.
- Diplomatic Strategy: Harris’s theoretical focus on diplomatic solutions over military interventions, particularly regarding Iran, may appeal to a war-weary electorate. However, lack of action or public statements also concerns voters.
- Reactive Support: Much of Harris’s support is reactionary, defending her against Republican criticisms and highlighting her management of issues like the Ukraine conflict and border security.
Sentiment Trends
Support for Harris is strong among those who appreciate her foreign policy positions. However, it is also possible that Democrats and anti-Trump voters project their own foreign desires on a candidate who has outlined very few concrete stances. Harris’s base is energized more by opposition attacks than by affirmative policy positions.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)