“Uncommitted” Democrat voters view Biden as a traditional, establishment candidate, which may not appeal to more progressive or anti-establishment voters.
Many voters may be looking for a candidate who is more progressive or radical, and who can bring about more significant change.
Uncommitteds are concerned about Biden's moderate political views, his long history in politics, and his handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Our Methodology
Demographics
All Voters
Sample Size
350,000
Geographical Breakdown
National
Time Period
30 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.
Since the Michigan primary, a growing movement of those voting “Uncommitted” in Democrat primary races has gained momentum. The organic movement was created out of protest of the Biden administration’s handling the Israeli-Palestinian war. Party infighting between Joe Biden Democrats and Uncommitteds is complex and multifaceted. This analysis will focus on three main areas: reasons for Uncommitted voters, perceptions of Biden, and the influence of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Reasons for Uncommitted Voters
Uncommitted voters in the Democrat Primary may be unwilling to support Biden for a variety of reasons. Some may not align with Biden's perceived moderate political views, preferring more progressive candidates. Others may be skeptical of his ability to enact meaningful change, given his long history in politics. Additionally, some voters may be wary of his age and health, questioning his ability to serve a full second term as president.
Perceptions of Biden
Public perception of Biden varies widely. Some view him as a steady hand with the experience and pragmatism needed to lead the country. Others see him as a career politician, disconnected from the needs of ordinary Americans. His handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict, in particular, has drawn criticism from both sides. More progressive voters believe he is too supportive of Israel, while more traditional Democrats argue he is not supportive enough.
Influence of the Israel-Palestine Conflict
The Israel-Palestine is one of the most significant issues on voter perceptions of Biden. Israel supporters argue Biden's approach to the conflict is too lenient on Hamas. Palestine supporters argue his pro-Israel approach supports genocide. This divide is reflected in the Democrat Party with younger or more progressive voters demanding support for Palestine and older or more moderate Democrats insisting the U.S. supports Israel.
Uncommitted Votes
Hawaii and Minnesota have received the highest Uncommitted votes so far with 29% and 19%.
Biden continues to receive critiques from the progressive wing of the Democrat Party, threatening his potential to have a strong showing against Trump in a general election.
Stay Informed
Share:
More Like This
With “Pride Month” over, Americans pivot to celebrate Independence Day. Public discourse reveals a divide in how citizens interpret the meaning of pride, liberty, and national identity. Online commentary over the past two days shows one side celebrating identity and inclusion and the other rallying around tradition, unity, and the symbolism of the American flag.
For many conservative-leaning Americans, the end of Pride is a relief and reclamation. July is viewed as a moment to restore focus on the country's founding principles—faith, family, sovereignty—not fringe social causes. There is enthusiasm for “real pride” marked by traditional patriotism, military valor, and economic self-determination.
Sentiment Overview
The emotional and rhetorical incongruity between Pride and Independence Day is stark. The two celebrations trigger opposing instincts and mobilize different coalitions.
Pride Month Sentiment
Celebratory but increasingly defensive.
Appeals to inclusion, civil rights, and identity recognition.
Centered on resilience, minority progress, and resistance to regression.
Concerned about government overreach and threats to healthcare and education access.
Language is often personal and historical using visibility and equality narratives.
Independence Day Sentiment
Assertive, patriotic, often triumphalist.
Appeals to tradition, faith, and national unity.
Focused on border security, economic nationalism, and constitutional rights.
Framed as a corrective to political correctness and cultural fragmentation.
Language is blunt, symbolic, and emotive—full of flags, emojis, and slogans like “America is back!”
Public moods suggest the transition to July shifts the energy away from progressive advocacy toward a reassertion of traditional American values. Many online posts reject Pride altogether, with phrases like “No Pride Month here. Ever!!!” and “My pride is the US flag” By contrast, Pride advocates remain defiant, pointing to an ongoing fight for dignity and legal protections.
Notable sentiment patterns
Many right-leaning users call for the end of "identity month fatigue," claiming June has become a forced celebration.
Others embrace July as a cultural reset, saying now the real pride month begins—American Pride.
Religious conservatives frame the transition as a moral realignment, invoking biblical principles and divine order.
Pride defenders highlight threats to Medicaid, gender-affirming care, and anti-discrimination laws embedded in current legislative fights.
Emotionally, Independence Day evokes triumph and authority. Pride evokes empathy and personal rights. The contrast of these moods fuels polarization, with little overlap in vocabulary or vision. For many Americans, July 4 has become about fighting back.
Themes in Public Discourse
The ideological split between Pride Month and Independence Day reveals a broader battle over what constitutes “American values.” These events act as cultural amplifiers, pushing competing visions of the nation into sharper focus.
Pride-aligned voices emphasize
Inclusion as patriotism: Arguing that equality for LGBTQ individuals is essential to fulfilling the promises of liberty and justice.
Ongoing struggle: Pride is seen as a reminder of resistance, not a fully realized triumph.
Opposition to censorship and rollback: Concerns around anti-LGBTQ legislation under Trump 2.0, parental rights bills, and cuts to social safety nets are central.
Pro-America voices emphasize
Restoration of order: Reclaiming “real” pride tied to the nation’s founding ideals.
God, country, and borders: A return to natural law, biblical values, and masculine patriotism.
Fiscal responsibility and sovereignty: Support for legislation like the Big Beautiful Bill, which they believe rights economic wrongs and restores national control.
Some voters on the right argue that Independence Day offers an opportunity to “de-program” from identity politics and remind Americans that freedom was earned through sacrifice, not social recognition. For them, Pride Month is symbolic of entitlement culture, whereas July 4 embodies discipline, unity, and historical greatness.
Competing Slogans and Symbols
Pride: "Love is love", “We’re still here”
Independence Day: 🇺🇸, “America First”, “God Bless the USA”
This symbolic divide illustrates a deeper philosophical one—between an America that evolves through recognition of difference and one that reasserts traditional identity.
Impact and Polarization
The cultural shift from June to July acts as a flashpoint, intensifying polarization.
Observable impacts in the online discourse:
Many express relief that June is over and view July as a time to “reclaim pride.”
Short, emoji-laden declarations like “America is back!” dominate Independence Day conversations.
Even some centrist or liberal-leaning voters express skepticism about Pride Month’s corporatization.
The vibe shift from June to July reveals that America’s national identity is contested terrain. The divide is emotional, generational, and moral. While some see July 4 as a celebration of universal freedom, others see it as a moment when their freedoms feel most precarious.
President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” clears the Senate by the slimmest possible margin—51 to 50—with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaking vote. For Republicans, it’s a major legislative win for permanent tax relief, renewed border security funding, and cuts to welfare spending. But public reactions are often sour.
Even among Republicans, where support should be more consistent, the landscape shifts depending on which provisions are under scrutiny. When discussions center on taxes and immigration, support climbs to 74%. When the focus turns to Medicaid or Senate procedure, support fragments. The BBB is becoming a Rorschach test for Trump loyalists versus deficit hawks.
Voters Sentiment Divides
MIG Reports data shows:
Overall public sentiment: 34% approval, 66% disapproval.
Republican sentiment: 74% approval, 26% disapproval—excluding outlier and Medicaid-focused discussions which are overwhelmingly negative.
Opposition threads run across ideological lines. Fiscal conservatives blast the $2.4–3.8 trillion projected increase to the national debt. Populist conservatives rage over the failure to remove illegal immigrants from Medicaid. Moderates and Independents express concern about both spending and the opaque legislative process.
The common thread is disappointment with how the bill was assembled, debated, and sold. Many Americans see it as a rushed, thousand-page package that delivered some wins while sidestepping others that mattered more. However, most Republicans understand that passing the bill is a necessary evil and part of the status quo.
What Supporters Are Celebrating
For its supporters, the BBB delivers on core America First commitments. The bill’s strongest applause lines come from working-class tax relief:
No taxes on tips or overtime—a targeted nod to service and hourly workers.
Permanent extension of 2017 tax cuts—restoring certainty for small business owners.
Expanded child tax credit and higher SALT cap—middle-class relief that plays well in suburban battlegrounds.
The immigration provisions also score with the base. The bill allocates $70 billion to border enforcement—including $46 billion for physical barriers—and funds a significant expansion of ICE operations. For Trump supporters, the bill proves that Republicans, at least under Trump’s direction, still legislate with national sovereignty in mind.
The symbolism of Vice President Vance making the tie-breaking vote is framed as a display of unity and resolve, especially after years of party infighting and legislative inertia. For the MAGA wing this win shows Trump can push through his agenda despite elite resistance.
What Critics Are Condemning
Disapproval of the BBB is sharpest around three pressure points: Medicaid, the national debt, and the bill’s procedural handling.
Failure to eliminate Medicaid eligibility for illegal immigrants enrages the Republican base.
In Medicaid-specific discussions, 85% of Republican voices oppose the Senate’s handling of this issue, with blame largely directed at the Senate Parliamentarian.
Projected increases to the national debt—ranging between $2.4 and $3.8 trillion—trigger backlash from deficit hawks and fiscally-minded conservatives.
While they support tax cuts in principle, many argue the BBB lacks corresponding spending restraint.
The process itself—1,000 pages, last-minute revisions, and heavy reliance on the Byrd Rule—fuel distrust.
The Parliamentarian’s role in stripping provisions only heightens the sense that unelected staffers are driving critical outcomes.
Critics say the bill prioritizes messaging over substance, and the hardest decisions around entitlements and enforcing immigration are sidelined for optics. The result is a bill that looks strong on paper but feels, to many, like a hollow win.
Inside the Fractures on the Right
The BBB exposes rifts inside the Republican coalition. While MAGA-aligned Republicans say the bill is a necessary part of Trump’s populist vision, other factions are less enthused. Fiscal conservatives, libertarians, and establishment-aligned voices view the package as sloppy, debt-heavy, and politically risky.
MAGA Populists view the BBB as a blunt-force affirmation of Trump’s 2024 mandate. They prioritize its immigration funding, tax relief, and symbolic value as a direct rejection of globalism and bureaucratic inertia. They see the system itself as rigged and believe brute legislative force is necessary.
Fiscal Hawks and Libertarians warn the bill abandons basic conservative principles. They point to the trillions in projected deficits and argue the bill ignores real structural reforms. The failure to reduce Medicaid spending or remove ineligible recipients is seen as a strategic retreat.
Establishment Republicans remain split or silent. Some oppose the bill outright, citing long-term risk and poor craftsmanship. Others stay quiet, wary of alienating their base, but their absence from the celebratory chorus underscores a lingering discomfort with Trump’s post-reelection legislative style.
The divisions are indicative of a larger struggle over what the GOP wants to be in the Trump 3.0 era: a populist party chasing big gestures, or a disciplined party managing hard realities.
The Cultural Backlash and Political Symbolism
Beyond policy, the BBB provokes symbolic and often satirical reactions. The bill’s title—Big Beautiful Bill—certainly draws derision and appropriation.
References to “Alligator Auschwitz” and the viral $KBBB memecoin emerge from both populist right and disaffected left circles, mocking the bill’s scale, speed, and contradictions.
Elon Musk’s opposition adds fuel, portraying the bill as an unsustainable “fiscal blob” designed to win headlines, not deliver results. His criticism, echoed by tech-aligned libertarians, amplifies generational and ideological divides.
The satire signals growing cynicism toward sweeping legislation wrapped in brand politics. To some, the BBB is just another D.C. circus act that fails to enact real reform.
Still, Trump’s branding works. “Big Beautiful Bill” may sound absurd to critics, but to supporters, it communicates boldness, confidence, and Trump’s unique ability to seize attention and force action. Even detractors are stuck using his language, which is one of his greatest political advantages.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis launched a visually dramatic migrant detention facility deep in the Everglades, branded by the public as “Alligator Alcatraz.” Using the region’s inhospitable terrain—snakes, swamps, and alligators—as natural security barriers. The facility is designed to house thousands of illegal migrants in trailer-based compounds. DeSantis is pitching it as a bold deterrent and a model of cost-effective containment.
🚨 JUST IN: Alligator Alcatraz will be funded with the money Biden set aside to put illegals in five star hotels, per @TriciaOhio
Illegals are going from the lush Roosevelt Hotel in New York City to a detention center surrounded by gators 🤣
President Trump visited the facility on July 1, signaling his support for strong immigration measures. However, voters are split on the way it’s being executed.
Doocy: With Alliagator Alcatraz, is the idea that if some illegal immigrant escapes, they just get eaten by an alligator?
Trump: I guess that’s the concept. Snakes are fast but alligators— we’re going to teach them how to run away from an alligator. Don’t run in a straight line,… pic.twitter.com/xnGTUTALDr
Rather than building credibility, the swamp-based facility is seen by many as undermining it. The response reveals a demand for competence over cosplay, especially when national security and taxpayer dollars are involved.
DeSantis and the Limits of Symbolism
DeSantis hopes to signal strength. But he is triggering a potentially avoidable wave of skepticism—much of it from those who support the goals he champions. The core problem is not the policy, but the packaging. Voters are saying he has mistaken aesthetic aggression for functional seriousness.
Among the dominant criticisms:
He is seen as mimicking Trump without his authenticity.
The facility evokes dystopian or fascist imagery even among conservatives.
The Everglades location raises environmental and logistical objections.
Phrases like “DeStalin’s swamp,” “ICE Barbie detention fantasy,” and “Survivor: Deportation Island” highlight the types of mockery online discussions display. While some of the jovial discourse is made in amused solidarity, many voters are displeased. Trump is remembered for results—Remain in Mexico, Title 42, ICE raids—DeSantis is associated here with optics.
In short:
Trump’s immigration policies are viewed as credible and effective.
DeSantis’s execution is seen as insecure and symbolic.
Trump’s Brand Still Dominates
While the Everglades stunt creates turbulence for DeSantis, Trump’s position remains largely intact. Voters continue to view him as the architect of effective immigration policy—not because of his rhetoric alone, but because of the results that followed it. The contrast is stark, and public sentiment reflects that distinction.
Voters trust Trump to execute mass deportations competently, without resorting to cartoonish tactics.
People reference his legacy programs—Remain in Mexico, Title 42, ICE expansion—favorably across all platforms.
Many frame DeSantis as someone trying to cosplay Trump’s policies, rather than carrying them forward with conviction.
Comments praising Trump’s “no-nonsense” approach appear alongside mockery of “Alligator Alcatraz.” The former is seen as a leader with teeth; the latter, a politician with props. For conservative voters, credibility on immigration isn’t about how loud the message is—it’s about who can enforce the law and survive the scrutiny.