culture Articles
-
Left-leaning Americans are angrily canceling their “Washington Post” subscriptions to the tune of 250,000—though apparently not their Amazon Prime accounts. Following a controversy in which WaPo and Amazon owner Jeff Bezos barred the newspaper from making a presidential endorsement.
UPDATE: The number of cancellations since Friday’s revelation now exceeds 250,000, NPR can report.
— David Folkenflik (@davidfolkenflik) October 29, 2024
That represents approximately 10 percent of all paid circulation. https://t.co/XrDDWR3Vt5The contradiction in liberal outcry against Bezos reveals the tension between stated ideals and real-life consumer choices. Americans are disillusioned with mainstream media and left leaning voters are showing their dissatisfaction by unsubscribing.
However, many on the right are pointing out various coping mechanisms and the selective outrage they see among liberals. They point out members of the media like Jennifer Rubin who criticized LA Times reporters who did not resign after the paper also made no endorsement. Rubin, who works for WaPo, has yet to resign.
Jennifer Rubin @JRubinBlogger cheered a reporter who quit in response to the LA times not endorsing either presidential canidate. She works for the Washington post which is also not endorsing this election let's reminder her that she is a hypocrite unless she resigns immediately pic.twitter.com/2mvpNBzS6N
— Steve (@Steve113875651) October 25, 2024Unsub from WaPo
Liberals often frame their decision to cancel their “Washington Post” as personal empowerment and ethical consumerism. They invoke, “taking a stand,” “voting with my wallet,” and “demanding truth.” Many are disillusioned with WaPo, using terms like “biased reporting” and “supporting ethical journalism” to validate their choice to unsubscribe.
Won’t Cancel Prime
However, there is deafening silence on the same activists canceling their Amazon Prime memberships. They justify this with practical language emphasizing convenience and necessity, such as “just too good to give up” and “I can’t live without my Prime.” This rationalization for keeping services that contradict their activism suggests a kind of opportunistic hypocrisy.
Language Analysis
Coping Mechanisms
Among those outraged about Jeff Bezos’s decision regarding WaPo endorsements, there is tendency toward self-justification. They use rationalizing phrases like “we deserve better,” portraying canceling subscriptions as a principled choice. This hints at cognitive dissonance, where values are flexible depending on convenience.
Hypocrisy Indicators
There’s a noticeable double standard where users critique WaPo for perceived corporate media bias yet justify Amazon Prime as essential, despite Amazon’s controversial practices.
Phrases like “corporate monsters are everywhere” reflect a resignation to the omnipresence of corporate influence, exposing a discrepancy between ideological intentions and consumer behavior. This focus suggests an emotional, issue-based hierarchy in which certain values can be sidelined based on the perceived relevance of the company involved.
An Amazon warehouse worker's 'thank you' bag for working Prime Big Deal Days earlier this month pic.twitter.com/PAEADIQvSs
— Michael Sainato (@msainat1) October 29, 2024Owning the Narrative
Many express a need for narratives that align with their personal values, reflecting a belief that media consumption should ideologically agree with readers. This causes a pattern of binary thinking where WaPo is labeled as becoming antagonistic to liberal values, while Amazon is a practical tool divorced from these political concerns.
Cognitive dissonance is a recurring theme as liberals openly struggle to reconcile their ideals with convenience. The discussions highlight how modern consumer habits complicate the pursuit of ideological purity, as practicality frequently overrides principles.
Performative Activism
Some describe their WaPo cancellation as part of “cancel culture” or an act of visibility rather than a purely ethical stance. This suggests it’s either performative or rhetorical. For some, canceling WaPo is less about values and more about participating in visible, symbolic acts.
In voter discussions around 75% of comments are negative toward WaPo, while Amazon Prime discussion is mostly neutral or slightly positive. This difference underscores a greater discontent with media credibility than corporate ethics, suggesting a prioritization of ideological alignment over ethical consistency.
31
Oct
-
The provocative nature of a recent Democratic supporting progressive ad, which showed a young man masturbating while watching porn, caused a firestorm of criticism. Many Americans find the notion of “porn on the ballot” as a surreal and disturbing issue to highlight.
For many who view porn as damaging to society, the ad raises questions about how Democrats frame personal freedom stakes. Some voters find irony in Democrats making abortion and porn their cornerstone liberty issues.
White Men for Harris are running this ad. (It’s not satire, it’s sincerely from them.)
— Cernovich (@Cernovich) October 26, 2024
They want people to share it, because it’ll help Kamala Harris win, or so they say?
Vulgar, I apologize for posting such filth, but it’s who they are. Understand it.
https://t.co/xS8MABQxsTThe Paradox of Porn on the Ballot
In an election dominated by economic, border, and national security concerns, highlighting pornography as a campaign issue is both unconventional and controversial. Most Americans view personal freedom as essential, yet the portrayal of porn as emblematic of key freedoms seems a curious choice.
The ad underscores the complexity of modern political campaigns, which often rely on shock tactics to capture fleeting attention spans. While the ad successfully provokes engagement, it also risks trivializing a significant conversation on civil liberties, distracting from the larger stakes in the upcoming election.
This controversy comes on the heels of numerous anti-porn movements. Viral memes stretch back to 2021, rising anti-porn sentiments, and sexually conservative generations coming to voting age complicate Democratic messaging.
Additionally, a growing list of states is requiring age of consent laws for online porn. Some suggest this political push is funded by the porn industry to fight age protection laws.
The porn industry is now spending 100k on ads to convince young men to vote for Kamala to prevent more age verification laws going into effect pic.twitter.com/kjbKL1YYJm
— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) October 7, 2024Provocative Engagement and Scandalized Reactions
The ad’s shock value is undeniable. It has sparked significant engagement, particularly among progressive audiences who interpret it as a bold statement on personal autonomy. By contrasting intimate freedoms with the risk of conservative censorship, the ad appeals to those who see freedom in private viewing habits as a top priority.
For moderates and traditionalists, the ad’s explicit content feels too coarse for a political campaign. The topic of pornography as a voter mobilization issue is, for many, an uncomfortable injection of degeneracy into political discourse. They see it as an intrusion, criticizing the oversimplification of complex regulation questions.
Reactions to the ad deepen ideological divides, with supporters lauding its unfiltered message on freedom and detractors criticizing it as vulgar. Supporters resonate with the ad’s message on autonomy, challenging authoritarian threats. Critics worry shock tactics cheapen the democratic process and lamenting the acceptance of porn in polite society.
Backlash and Desensitization
Depicting graphic content created both intrigue and backlash. Some argue the ad’s extremity risks desensitizing viewers, turning legitimate discussions about civil liberties into social media fodder rather than meaningful political discourse.
By veering into taboo, the ad might alienate more conservative or moderate voters but also risks trivializing freedom of expression and government overreach.
While the ad aims to mobilize progressive voters, it inadvertently energizes Trump’s base. Those who view the content as indicative of progressive excess use it as evidence of a moral divide, reaffirming their stance against societal degradation imposed by liberal ideologies.
This reaction heightens an us-versus-them mentality, deepening political and cultural animosity. The ad’s raunchy portrayal may end up galvanizing conservative opposition, energizing them under the banner of traditional values and perceived threats to decency.
The issue that Tampon Tim has decided to focus on in the final week of the election:
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 29, 2024
*checks notes*
Pornography. pic.twitter.com/oHlx9jBSAo29
Oct
-
On Oct. 26, outside a Harris rally in Houston, TX, a woman was caught on camera screaming into a child's face. Predictably, reactions to the clip were overwhelmingly negative. MIG Reports analysis shows outrage toward the woman’s conduct, sparking wider conversations of party support.
Kamala Harris supporter is going viral for screaming at a child in a stroller pic.twitter.com/RSE4bEi7x8
— Unlimited L's (@unlimited_ls) October 26, 2024Scream Heard Around the World
The viral clip of a woman screaming at the child cuts through typical political rhetoric. Americans express visceral reactions, with many viewing the incident as a sign of moral decay and loss of decorum in public spaces.
Reactions are sharply negative as most view the behavior as a lapse in appropriate conduct. However, while some denounce the incident, they take the opportunity to emphasize support for Harris’s platform and commitment to women’s rights. Responses highlight ideological divides and how unacceptable public behavior impacts the broader perception of political movements.
Competing Interpretations
The incident also shifts focus from policy or campaign discussions to the charged environment in politics. Opponents use this event as a tool to portray Harris's supporters as emblematic of intolerance or extremism. They paint Harris rallies as chaotic rather than structured and under control.
This group points out multiple instances of hecklers disrupting Harris’s speeches, unruly crowds booing and drowning her out, and swaths of disgruntled attendees who objected to unfulfilled promises of a free Beyonce performance.
Harris supporters attempt to reclaim the narrative by framing the incident in a context of passion and advocacy for women’s rights. This narrative clash suggests emotions, particularly when they appear extreme or uncontrolled, risk solidifying an "us vs. them" framework that perpetuates division rather than fostering discourse.
Emotional Expression in Politics
Social media discussions show voter frustration with the overall political climate. Words like “chaos,” “unacceptable,” and “childish” express laments about a loss of civility and respectful discourse. Yet, these terms also expose the irony of simultaneously intensifying polarization.
Reactions allow for public displays of emotion—including negative ones—to be seen as integral parts of the political experience. Supporters align themselves with a “voice of reason,” while critics paint the opposing side in a radical light, using the incident as both a symbol and justification for their stances.
Passion Mobilizes Voters
For both sides, the incident has the potential to catalyze voter mobilization. Harris's supporters may feel a renewed sense of solidarity, driven to participate and defend against any mischaracterizations or attacks on their values.
GOP voters see the incident as validating their criticisms. They rally around the need to counter moral and social degradation. Moderate or undecided voters say the incident is discouraging. They say extreme emotional expression at political events may indicate an erosion of civility and effective political governance.
Language Insights
The language around the incident is symbolic. People talk about the image of an adult screaming in a child’s face as a powerful metaphor. It taps into anxieties about the safety of children in a divided society, making the incident a microcosm for larger fears about social and political disintegration.
People use phrases like "respect for children" and "moral decay." There is collective processing of the broader implications of public outbursts, portraying the interaction as emblematic of the contentious spirit in contemporary politics.
29
Oct
-
Trump's Madison Square Garden (MSG) rally is spurring wild and fervent discussion just a week ahead of Election Day. The rally’s impact, intensified by strong media framing, shows sharp divides among Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. But MIG Reports data shows the mainstream media’s plan to demonize Trump voters may be backfiring.
The top discussion topics related to the rally are:
- A comedian who goes by the state name “Kill Tony” joked about Puerto Rico being a “floating island of garbage.”
- The media’s reaction comparing the rally to a 1939 pro-Nazi rally at MSG.
- Trump campaigning in blue states like New York, suggesting he wants to win them.
- High energy and triumph for the MAGA movement around the size of the rally.
At Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally, podcast host and comedian Kill Tony referred to Puerto Rico as a “floating island of garbage,” during his set.
— Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) October 27, 2024
Notably, four percent of Pennsylvanians are Puerto Rican.
Around 500,000 people. pic.twitter.com/txE3UD0QVEThe Media’s Streisand Effect?
Mainstream media outlets presented Trump’s rally through a highly critical lens. Many compared it to a 1939 pro-Nazi rally at MSG, calling Trump’s event an echo of the same.
This framing doubles down on the Harris campaign’s recent messaging of Trump as a fascist and a Nazi sympathizer. However, the media’s portrayal drew different reactions across groups—either as a rallying cry or confirmation of a disingenuous media.
- Independent are Split: Independents and undecideds are divided, with 65% viewing the media’s portrayal as excessive, while 35% feel it’s justified.
- Republicans Dismiss Hysteria: Republicans overwhelmingly dismiss Nazi comparisons as unfair attacks. Many say the strategy is backfiring since dramatic and hysterical rhetoric sounds unserious to reasonable people.
- Democrats Love Nazi Comparisons: Most Democratic voters say the Nazi comparison is accurate and necessary. They see it as an obvious conclusion in light of their beliefs about Trump as a fascist.
Among persuadable voters and those who are not deeply partisan Democrats, most voters view the media’s rhetoric as over the top. However, because the Harris campaign and mainstream media are leaning so hard into the Nazi comparisons, more voters are taking to social media to express their criticism.
New York a Swing State?
At the rally, Vivek Ramaswamy stirred discussion with his assertion that “New York could become a swing state.” This remark, intended to convey optimism about Republican growth in traditionally Democratic areas, receives mixed reactions.
VIVEK: “Welcome to 2024. New York is a swing state.” 🔥 pic.twitter.com/Uqv4ScJ3bj
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) October 27, 2024- Republicans mostly embrace Ramaswamy’s comments, seeing his assertion as a bold and energizing signal of shifting political tides. The idea of New York as a potential battleground boosts morale among Republicans.
- Democrats dismiss Ramaswamy’s statement as unrealistic, perceiving it as wishful thinking. Many Democratic commenters say New York’s demographics and liberal base will not be competitive any time soon.
- Independents are divided. Some appreciate the ambitious tone, viewing it as optimistic for political realignments. However, many also question the practicality of Republicans winning over a heavily liberal electorate.
AOC Feigns Outrage
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was holding an online gaming rally with VP candidate Tim Walz during the MSG rally. Reacting to Tony Hinchcliffe’s Puerto Rico joke, AOC tweeted her offense, saying “4,000+ Puerto Ricans died” under Trump.
She framed the joke as representative of the MAGA movement’s disregard for marginalized communities, calling for Latino voters to share the offense with their families. However, AOC subsequently tweeted admitting she was not offended by the joke, but solely for Hinchcliffe’s willingness to go on stage for Trump.
And before people try to act like this is some PC overly sensitive nonsense, I’ve been to Kill Tony shows. I’m from the Bronx. I don’t give a shit about crude humor.
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) October 27, 2024
But don’t pretend that your support for Trump is a joke. Own it. You doing a set to support him. That’s a choice.- Democrats support AOC’s criticisms, voicing urgency for opposing Trump.
- Republicans mock and dismiss, AOC as politically motivated and disingenuous.
- Independents are split between being offended by the joke and viewing AOC’s reaction as trivial and dramatic.
Independents Mostly Distrust the Media
For Independents and undecideds, the MSG rally only became a point of interest following media characterizations. This led many to compare Trump’s populist messaging with the media’s critical framing.
- Nazi Rally: Around 65% of Independents dismiss the Nazi rally comparisons as media hyperbole. Only 35% accept it as a legitimate warning of rising extremism.
- Puerto Rico Joke: About 30% of discussions among Independents condemned the Puerto Rico joke, perceiving it as offensive to Latino voters.
- Potential Sway: 15% say they sense desperation among Democrats and that pushes them toward Trump.
Election Impact from Undecideds
The media’s framing generally mobilizes Democrats, reinforces Republican loyalty, and divides Independents. An already polarized electorate mostly responds with heightened partisanship. However, moderates and undecideds who are already skeptical of Democrats say the dramatic rhetoric turns them off.
- Trump Support: 55% of undecided voters say the media’s portrayal and Nazi comparisons makes them more likely to vote for Trump.
- Extremism Concern: 45% of undecideds lament inflammatory comments made during the event, suggesting it repulsed them from supporting Trump.
While many agree there are very few votes available to be swayed, MIG Reports data consistently shows undecideds likely leaning toward Trump.
Republicans are Unfazed
Unsurprisingly, Republicans are energized. They view turnout in a Democratic stronghold as a point of pride. They say the rally is a celebration of American solidarity and patriotism, framing criticisms as further proof of media bias against conservatives.
- Turnout Pride: Around 75% of Republicans are celebrating the success of the rally, seeing it as an affirmation of Trump’s draw and a sign of enduring support.
- Media Criticism: Roughly 65% believe the “Nazi rally” label is a biased attack, reinforcing views of Trump as a political outsider fighting establishment elites.
- Puerto Rico Joke: Only about 20% find the joke about Puerto Rico inappropriate, most dismiss the backlash as feigned outrage by Democrats like AOC.
- Unity: Many Republicans mention endorsements from minority groups, including Puerto Ricans, saying this refutes media portrayals of the rally as exclusionary.
Democrats Worked into a Froth
A whopping 80% of Democrats view the rally as a gathering of extremism. They call the rhetoric exclusionary and inflammatory, using the Puerto Rico joke as a prime example. They almost wholly embrace the media’s framing, presenting an urgent call to the ideological battle against Trump and his base.
- Hate Speech: 80% of Democrats see the rally as promoting hate speech, viewing the “Nazi rally” comparison as an accurate description.
- Focus on Mobilization: 70% call for strong voter turnout, using the rally as a call to reject Trump and get people to the ballot box.
- A Thread of Hope: Roughly 65% of Democrats say the rally’s tone could alienate undecided voters. They hope undecided voters will side with them, ignoring those who feel alienated by the media’s rhetoric.
29
Oct
-
Online voter sentiment toward Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is often negativity, particularly for Harris. Her digital strategy and media appearances especially turn off voters who doubt the authenticity of her campaign messaging.
Disproportionate Negativity for Harris
Across social media, 67% of discussions mentioning Harris are negative. Sentiment toward Trump is more positive, with 60-65% of discussions expressing admiration for his leadership, primarily on economic issues and national identity.
Support for Harris drops as low as 20% in several instances, but never surpasses 50% positive sentiment. This is even true among younger, diverse, and progressive demographics, her opposition is both vocal and persistent.
This opposition criticizes her as a political insider entrenched in establishment politics. much of the commentary focuses on her failure to inspire confidence and the inauthenticity of her campaign.
Even left-leaning media outlets like CNN are critical of Harris’s online presence, calling out the KamalaHQ campaign account for deceiving voters.
CNN just nuked @KamalaHQ for their constant lies about Trump and Vance.https://t.co/1UWGpK8fPt pic.twitter.com/lhdeHpLWCt
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) September 14, 2024Meanwhile, Trump's opposition, around 33% of the discussion, often involves accusations that he incites division and actively undermines democratic values.
Trump Has Stronger Engagement on Social Media
A significant disparity in social media engagement numbers and follower counts draws contrast between Trump and Harris. Data from Social Blade shows the differences in reach and interaction, which plays a critical role in shaping overall sentiment online.
TikTok
- Trump has 12.2 million followers compared to Harris’s 6.1 million.
- Engagement for Trump is also higher, with 74.5 million likes to Harris’s 63.6 million.
- Despite Harris maintaining steady follower growth, Trump’s rapid increase in likes and followers shows his dominance.
- Key issues like immigration and nationalism drive Trump’s engagement and support.
Twitter (X)
- Trump boasts 91.8 million X followers, far outpacing Harris’s 21.2 million.
- This significant difference in reach means Trump’s X posts can garner more immediate attention and interaction.
- Increased reach allows Trump to effectively mobilize supporters who respond to anti-establishment messages.
- Harris’s smaller following and lower engagement hinder her ability to generate the same level of excitement and loyalty.
YouTube
- Trump earned 140K subscribers and 20.1 million views on YouTube in the last 30 days, his totals are 3.5 million subscribers and over 891 million views.
- Harris gained 94K subscribers and 21.5 million views, raising her totals to 639K subscribers and 71.8 million views.
- While Trump maintains a broader reach, Harris’s recent growth in views slightly outpaced Trump's, showing a growing engagement with her content.
Identity Politics Doesn’t Trump the Economy
Harris’s campaign leans heavily on identity politics to gain support from black, Latino, and young progressive voters. The messaging strategy emphasizes Harris as a representative of diversity and inclusivity, framing her as the black female candidate voters need.
However, even within these groups there's skepticism. Black men particularly express doubt about her ability to address systemic racism. They are split, with some commenting on the Democratic Party's failure to bring about meaningful change and economic relief.
Though not heavily emphasizing identity politics, Trump support is strong with white, conservative, and rural demographics. His anti-establishment rhetoric resonates strongly in these groups. Trump voters view him as a leader fighting against a corrupt political system, emphasizing traditional values and national pride.
The GOP base expresses loyalty to Trump’s “America First” policies over identity, particularly on issues like immigration and economic recovery. Even his critics acknowledge his ability to capture the narrative and maintain a strong presence.
Demographics and Anti-Establishment Sentiment
Demographic support and opposition are complex. Black and Latino voters, who are traditionally Democratic voters, show signs of division in their social media discussion.
While many support Harris for her progressive stance, there is disillusionment with the Democratic establishment, indicating a growing anti-elite and anti-establishment sentiment that crosses racial lines. Americans are frustrated systemic neglect, and some black voters gravitate toward Trump as a defiant outsider.
Among white voters, many express unwavering support for Trump. They describe their loyalty as a cultural and political pushback against “elites” and “liberal politics.” This group views Harris as embodying the establishment, criticizing her failures to address issues like crime and border security.
Linguistic Analysis
The language used in social media commentary about both candidates is revealing, not just of surface-level opinions, but of deeper social and psychological patterns.
- Kamala Harris faces an onslaught of derogatory language, particularly centered around her competence and identity as a woman of color.
- Phrases like "incompetent" and gendered slurs are employed to undermine her authority.
- Her critics use rhetorical questions and sarcasm to frame her as ineffective, casting doubt on her ability to lead.
Trump supporters often deploy hyperbolic language, framing him as a hero standing against powerful enemies.
- Terms like "patriot," "savior," and "best president ever" are common, reinforcing a narrative of Trump as a fighter for the American people.
- Even in negative commentary, the language about Trump focuses on moral accusations—such as threats to democracy—rather than questioning his leadership ability.
The linguistic patterns also reveal a striking difference in how each candidate's supporters and detractors position themselves. Trump's base uses simple, declarative statements that assert loyalty. Harris's supporters often couch their praise in defensive language, reflecting a less consolidated base.
25
Oct
-
The intersection of religion and politics remains divisive in American discourse, particularly when public figures make statements that evoke strong religious, and areligious, sentiments. Two recent events sparked discussions about Christianity in the Republican and Democratic parties.
- At a Kamala Harris rally, two attendees loudly proclaimed, “Jesus is Lord.” She responded saying, “you’re at the wrong rally.”
- During a Republican rally, J.D. Vance replied, “That’s right, Jesus is King,” to audience members who shouted similar sentiments.
Unbelievable!!
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) October 18, 2024
As Kamala is on stage fear mongering about abortion, someone shouts “Jesus is Lord!” To which she replies:
“Oh, I think you guys are at the wrong rally.”
Christians are not welcome in Kamala’s Democrat Party. Vote accordingly. pic.twitter.com/aoJiRqnERKWOW.
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) October 20, 2024
Someone just yelled “JESUS IS KING!” at a JD Vance rally
His response?
“That’s right. Jesus is King.” ✝️
48 hours ago, Kamala had a young boy dragged out of her rally for yelling the same thing, telling him he was “at the wrong rally”
pic.twitter.com/LJ1GgXCs00These two events sparked fervent reactions on social media among secular and religious audiences. MIG Reports data shows:
- Overall reactions to Harris are mostly negative but positive toward Vance.
- Liberals and younger voters reacted most positively to Harris.
- Conservative Christians and young voters responded most positively to Vance.
Harris: "You’re at the Wrong Rally"
65% Negative Sentiment
- Harris’s dismissal of Christians received widespread criticism.
- Many Americans view it as disrespectful and indicative of the Democratic Party’s broader disconnect from faith-based voters.
- Many comments accuse Harris of being anti-Christian, expressing distrust of her stance on religion.
15% Positive Sentiment
- Harris supporters defended her decision to prioritize political discourse over religious declarations.
- They praise her for maintaining the separation of church and state.
- Progressives and secular voters are the most vocal supporters of Harris’s comments.
15-20% Neutral Sentiment
- Some are indifferent, focusing on the political strategy behind Harris’s response.
- They avoid engaging emotionally with the religious component, taking a hands-off approach.
Vance: "Jesus is King"
45% Positive Sentiment
- Vance’s affirmation of faith resonates strongly with religious conservatives.
- Supporters se his statement as a bold and necessary alignment of moral and political values.
- They praise him for integrating Christianity into his political platform.
35% Negative Sentiment
- Secular liberals and some moderates criticize Vance’s statement, arguing it blurs the lines between church and state.
- Detractors question the sincerity of his religious rhetoric, accusing him of using faith for political gain.
20% Neutral Sentiment
- Some responses are indifferent, focusing instead on broader political issues and downplaying the significance of Vance’s religious affirmation.
Demographic Patterns
Both incidents drew sharp demographic divides. These patterns reveal cultural fault lines between different political and religious groups in the U.S.
Kamala Harris
- Religious Voters: There is overwhelming disapproval from religious conservatives, particularly Christians who feel alienated by Harris’s disregard for faith. About 80% of comments from these groups express strong negative reactions.
- Political Groups: Liberal and progressive voters are more likely to defend Harris, with up to 70% of comments either positive or neutral toward her stance.
- Age Demographics: Younger voters, particularly those under 35, are more inclined to support Harris’s secular approach. 55+ voters are critical, often citing traditional religious values as being under threat by her rhetoric.
J.D. Vance
- Religious Conservatives: Evangelical Christians and conservative Republicans are the largest supporters. They view faith as a necessary affirmation of America’s Christian identity and moral framework.
- Secular and Progressive Voters: Criticism of Vance comes largely from secular progressives. They see his statement as an inappropriate merger of faith and governance. They emphasize keeping religion out of political rhetoric.
- Independents and Moderates: Independent voters have mixed reactions, with some willing to engage with religious messaging while others are skeptical about its relevance to governance.
Linguistic and Rhetorical Themes
The language used in reactions provides additional insight into the role of religion in public life.
Kamala Harris
- Dismissive Rhetoric: Many view Harris’s remark, "You’re at the wrong rally," as dismissive. They say it furthers perceptions of Democrats as disconnected from voters of faith. Religious conservatives feel excluded by her response.
- Religious Imagery: Critics of Harris use religious imagery, with phrases like "Kamala Hates Jesus." These responses frame her as antagonistic to Christian values, highlighting the divide between secular and religious voters.
J.D. Vance
- Religious Affirmation: The phrase "Jesus is King" resonates with those who see it as an affirmation of faith in public life. The use of religious language is a rallying cry for conservative Christians.
- Polarizing Rhetoric: Critics use terms like "manipulating faith" and "political opportunism" to express their disapproval of religion and politics. Secular voters are skeptical about the sincerity and appropriateness of religious rhetoric.
Deeper Meaning and Cultural Implications
Kamala Harris
Harris’s interaction underscores the challenge progressive politicians face in navigating secular progressivism with religion and politics. Many Americans view her dismissiveness as emblematic of an anti-religious agenda that alienates voters of faith, particularly those from more conservative Christian backgrounds.
J.D. Vance
Vance’s embrace of religious rhetoric represents the Republican Party’s broader alignment with Christian conservatism. His affirmation of faith is celebrated by supporters as a necessary expression of moral governance. However, critics object to religion as a political tool or a violation of separating church and state.
23
Oct
-
Donald Trump’s recent stop at a McDonald’s is hotly discussed online and in the media. Those on the left view it as a trivial campaign stunt, but for many voters, it’s a gesture of good-humored solidarity with working Americans.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 21, 2024
Voter discussions about this event are split along partisan lines. Democrats and liberals are mostly critical, calling the campaign stop “staged,” “pretend,” and “disrespectful.” Trump supporters, meanwhile, reacted positively, embracing Trump’s tongue-in-cheek but authentic retail politics as indicative of his relatable love for America and Americans.
Reactions to the McDonald’s visit serve as a microcosm of Trump’s broader campaign strategy, underscoring his unique ability to tap into working-class nostalgia, populism, and defiance against elitism.
Why McDonald’s Matters
From a simple fast-food stop, a narrative emerges that reflects the broader divide in the American electorate. MIG Reports data shows:
Support from Trump’s Base
- 60% of Trump supporters express strong positive sentiments toward the McDonald’s visit.
- Many view it as a testament to Trump’s connection with everyday Americans, a leader who eschews elitism and embraces the working class.
- Comments from this group suggest Trump’s authenticity continues to bolster his populist appeal.
- This gesture reinforces beliefs that Trump is “one of us,” a sentiment key to his ongoing political success.
Humor Among Supporters
- 30% of supporters admit it's performative, but say a lighthearted moment being twisted by the media is as unserious as Trump working at McDonald’s.
- While they still support the visit, they focus on countering liberal narratives with things like, "It's just fries and a burger."
- They emphasize the hypocrisy of incredulous media reactions over any meaningful political impact the event may have.
Breathless Indignation from the Left
Despite widespread jocularity among Republicans, the media and Democrats flail against the campaign stunt.
Walz on The View: Trump going to work at a McDonald's was disrespectful to McDonald's workers. pic.twitter.com/2ZMB9MrNNI
— Washington Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) October 21, 2024Out-of-Touch Criticism
- 70% of liberal reactions to the McDonald’s visit were negative, often mocking it as a low point in presidential decorum.
- Many on the left seize upon the chance to frame Trump as out of touch with the responsibilities of leadership, saying he made a mockery of the working class.
- Liberals also say Trump’s McDonald’s appearance clearly shows his unhinged or declining mental state.
Moderates and Traditional Republicans
- 20% of liberals react with deep seriousness, framing the visit as indicative of a troubling populist trend within the Republican Party.
- They call it a facile attempt to curry favor with everyday Americans while he fails to adequately address more substantive issues.
- Some say theatrics detract from pressing social and economic issues, insisting Trump is engaging in frivolous behavior.
Meme Culture and the Power of Symbolism
One of the most fascinating aspects of Trump’s McDonald’s visit is how powerfully it is amplified through memes and social media. Supporters and critics alike have used images and symbols to create narratives that align with their perspectives.
Supportive Memes
- Trump voters quickly turned the McDonald’s stop into a meme, celebrating his authenticity.
- Homage memes frame Trump as relatable, using his friendly and personable image to contrast him with political and cultural elites who they see as hostile and disingenuous.
- Many memes mock the over-serious reactions from Democrats and the media which claim the stunt is deceptive and staged.
Critical Memes
- Critics of the McDonald’s visit attempt to portray Trump as unserious or unfit for leadership, making light of his penchant for fast food and claiming he is “not well.”
- Many in the media feign confusion, calling the event “bizarre” or “not logical,” generating more memes among those who disbelieve the media’s sincerity.
Trump at McDonald’s being shown how French fries are made pic.twitter.com/neD4qa74MB
— Acyn (@Acyn) October 20, 2024The Iconography of Trump’s Campaign
Trump’s ability to harness powerful images to reinforce his message isn’t limited to McDonald’s. His campaign phot ops have been unparalleled in this election, with many pointing to iconic images filled with emotion, patriotism, and memetic power.
The most iconic campaign of all time pic.twitter.com/Tw2TLFg0eu
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) October 20, 2024Voters compare memorable imagery from Trump’s campaign, including:
- Trump’s mugshot in 2023, which became a symbol of his "politics of defiance." Supporters view this image as representing the fight against a corrupt system.
- Likely the most powerful image from the campaign, many people mention Trump’s defiant pose after the failed assassination attempt.
- Many also point to images of Trump and RFK Jr., representing the unifying and cross-party enthusiasm for the populist MAGA platform.
- Some also point to images of Trump sipping cola at the Al Smith dinner as a sign of his collectedness in a hostile environment.
Momentum Building for the Trump Camp
The McDonald’s stop may seem trivial at first glance, but voter discussions around the event reveal much about the race and American feelings around average citizens versus elites and power brokers.
- Populism Over Performance: Trump supporters view him as relatable and capable of connecting with American working-class values. They voice their admiration for a leader who "gets them."
- Liberal Elitism: The left’s continued attacks elicit accusations of establishment figures demeaning and alienating voters. Their unwillingness to see the power in Trump’s endearing gestures is glaring weakness in their own political strategy.
- A Visual Campaign: From mugshots to fast-food stops, Trump’s campaign thrives on powerful, patriotic imagery. These symbols of defiance and authenticity resonate deeply with voters who feel overlooked by the political establishment.
23
Oct
-
Donald Trump’s appearance at a Pittsburgh Steelers game, with support from former players Le'Veon Bell and Antonio Brown, sparked intense discussions across social media. The intersection of sports and politics, combined with Trump's polarizing presence, generated fervent support and harsh criticism.
Something truly beautiful is happening in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania right now. Former Steelers Legends Antonio Brown and Le’Veon Bell are registering hundreds of new Trump voters
— George (@BehizyTweets) October 20, 2024
The culture is with Trump all the way this time.
pic.twitter.com/U4BoCgTM1nHowever, reaction may also point to a hidden or silent vote, quietly aligning with Trump’s values and leadership without engaging in the volatile public discourse.
President @realDonaldTrump arrives at Acrisure Stadium to chants of U-S-A! 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/TaVUjTDuT9
— Margo Martin (@margommartin) October 21, 2024Polarization in Public Discourse
Voter conversations online are polarized about Trump’s connection with the Steelers. Sentiment trends demonstrate a split between those who view Trump as a symbol of traditional American values and those who see his involvement in sports as problematic.
Some also point out that television coverage of Trump at the Steelers game was extremely limited, showing only a few seconds of him on the Sunday Night Football broadcast. However, viral social media videos show the crowd loudly and enthusiastically cheering, “USA, USA, USA,” as Trump waved down from his box seats.
Actual footage of the Steelers game tonight NBC won’t show you. pic.twitter.com/iK35jYAiDc
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) October 21, 2024The implication may be that—while online conversations are highly polarized, real-life voters are charged for Trump’s patriotic message. Thousands of fans cheering in a football stadium may capture sentiments which are absent online as not all voters engage in political discourse on social media.
Positive Sentiment
Around 45% of comments across various platforms express support for Trump, emphasizing his alignment with American values, patriotism, and leadership. Many fans appreciate his connection to blue-collar workers and traditional values, especially among older demographics, who see him as a “real American” representing their interests.
Negative Sentiment
Around 35-40% are critical of Trump’s appearance at the game, often voicing concerns about politicizing sports. These sentiments are especially pronounced among younger fans, who tend to view Trump’s involvement as divisive and distracting from the Steelers' legacy.
Former Pittsburgh Steelers are split on the Presidential election. One side has Mean Joe Greene, Jerome Bettis, and the family of Franco Harris supported her..
— Ryan Clark (@Realrclark25) October 20, 2024
and the other has Leveon Bell & Antonio Brown.
Different class of folks for sure.Neutral Sentiment
Roughly 20% are neutral, focusing on the spectacle of Trump’s appearance without delving deeply into political allegiances. This group reflects the broader discomfort with the merging of sports and politics, without taking a strong stance.
A Hidden or Ignored Vote?
Though polarization dominates public discourse, there are signs of hidden support for Trump among those who choose not to voice their opinions openly.
Rising Focus on American Values
The volume and sentiment around American Values discussions have both increased, with up to 1,600 comments per day, reflecting growing resonance, particularly among older, conservative voters. Many in this group may avoid engaging in public debates but align strongly with Trump's ideals, contributing to the silent support.
Decreasing Engagement with Racial Issues
Discussions around Racial Issues have seen both a decline in volume and a decrease in sentiment. This suggests that while the issue remains relevant for some, it is becoming less central in broader discussions. The shift away from this topic may be another indicator that voters are gravitating more to Trump over the identity-driven Democratic platform.
Generational and Regional Dynamics
- Younger voters (18-35) remain more critical, with racial and socio-political issues often dominating their critiques.
- Older voters (36+) show strong support for Trump, with 70% of their comments expressing positive sentiment.
This suggests older voters may avoid confrontational debates but \quietly support Trump. National-level enthusiasm for Trump contrasts with the mixed reactions from local Pittsburgh residents, further indicating potential hidden support in offline conversations.
Neutral Sentiment as Silent Support
The presence of 15-25% neutral sentiment, particularly in the context of rising engagement with American Values, could signal silent support for Trump. In an environment where dissatisfaction is often vocalized online, a large neutral perspective points to those who prefer not to engage publicly but may lean toward Trump privately.
Linguistic Cues: Identity and Patriotism
The language used in pro-Trump discussions like “freedom,” “real American,” and “working-class hero," evokes traditional American ideals. Critics, on the other hand, focus on terms like “politicizing” and “distraction.” This contrast may suggest Trump’s supporters remain quiet but deeply aligned with his values.
The Intersection of Sports and Politics
Trump’s association with the Steelers taps into cultural themes of working-class pride and American identity. For many older voters, this connection solidifies their support, but they may remain silent in polarized public forums while intending to vote for Trump.
22
Oct
-
The growing influence of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement may have a significant impact on election results. Many people previously considered health a niche focus. But growing opposition to GMOs and skepticism of pharmaceutical companies has emerged as an important issue for critical voter groups.
MIG Reports data shows MAHA has strong support and discussion among Republicans and Independents. There is also significant discussion among women, though with moderated enthusiasm due to Kennedy aligning with Trump. Democrats discuss MAHA less, but with some disaffected segments cautiously engaging.
Independents Want Health not Partisanship
One of the most important groups influenced by the MAHA movement is Independent voters. While traditionally difficult to predict, the 2024 election seems to be shifting some previously ambivalent voters toward Trump through RFK Jr.’s health platform.
Among this group, RFK Jr.'s outsider status and his emphasis on personal liberties is key—they are not swayed by partisan arguments but may be drawn to vote for health issues they prioritize.
Their engagement with the MAHA may be nuanced as some are excited by potential health reforms, while others are hesitant about aligning with Trump.
Independent Voters
- 40-50% of Independents are actively engaging with the MAHA platform.
- 35-40% express enthusiasm for health policies, overcoming their distaste for both major political parties.
- 20-30% resonate with MAHA while remaining wary of association with Trump.
Independents are known for valuing substance over party loyalty, and health reform could be the issue that moves this key voter bloc.
Women Want Health, Despite Trump
Female voters are another key group Trump stands to gain through the MAHA coalition. This offers a unique opportunity for the GOP, which traditionally struggles to attract women.
MIG Reports data previously showed women increasing prioritize health issues. Many say they are willing to look past their concerns about Trump in favor of MAHA’s health platform. They would rather reform health policy than avoid Trump, suggesting their primary focus is on achieving tangible public health outcomes.
Female Voters
- 40% of women are discussing health and healthcare policy issues over other political topics.
- 25% say they prioritize health issues over partisanship, willing to embrace Trump.
Many women are frustrated with the current healthcare system, particularly regarding access to affordable services and nutrition in low-income areas. They see health reforms as essential to their families' well-being.
The MAHA platform’s focus on reforming healthcare, reducing chronic disease, and improving food safety has created a pragmatic voter bloc willing to support health improvements, even if it means aligning temporarily with Trump.
This group, despite strong tendencies toward pro-choice and Democratic health policies may opt to align with Republicans if it means achieving the health reforms MAHA proposes.
Disillusioned Democrats Like MAHA
In general, Democrats who support health remain wary of MAHA due to party loyalty. Many Democratic voters disapprove of RFK Jr.’s alignment with Trump, even if they were previously drawn to Kennedy’s health policies. For many Democrats, anti-Trump and partisan motivations supersede other priorities.
However, there is some engagement from disaffected former Democrats—which aligns with partisan shifts among leaders like Kennedy and Tulsi Gabbard. These voters are both drawn by health autonomy but also expressing feelings of betrayal by their party. Many feel the Democratic Party, once the champion of the working class and progressive causes, has become too intertwined with corporate interests and government mandates in healthcare.
Many are also discontented about the lack of a Democratic primary, where Kamala Harris was ushered in by establishment elites. They dislike the most radical wings of the Party seeming to control policies and messaging in the current administration.
The disdain for current Democratic leadership is strong, with voters expressing feelings of betrayal from a party they once supported. One comment encapsulates this sentiment saying, "I used to be a diehard liberal, but this is no longer the party I once loved."
Democratic Voters
- 15-25% of Democrats are discussing RFK Jr. and MAHA-related topics.
- 20-30% express some interest in MAHA, though hesitant to abandon party loyalty.
For disaffected Democrats, the MAHA movement encourages taking the leap away from a Democratic establishment which clearly dismisses their health concerns. RFK Jr.’s aggressive stance against corporate power—especially his legal battles against Monsanto—resonates with those on the left who used to view Democrats as fighting against cronyism. While these Democrats may not fully align with the GOP, the MAHA movement could peel off voters who see sharp hypocrisy in Democratic messaging.
The Growing Appeal MAHA in the GOP
Another important shift is the enthusiastic embrace of RFK Jr.'s health-centric policies among Republicans. Traditionally focused on fiscal conservatism and national security, many Republicans now view personal health autonomy as imperative—especially after COVID.
The “crunchy” or health fanatic view many Republicans may previously have associated with RFK Jr.’s policies has softened. Now, many Americans view health as non-partisan, embracing any administration that will actively prioritize personal health freedoms.
Republican Voters
- 30-40% of Republicans are discussing RFK Jr. and MAHA.
- 50-70% of view MAHA positively.
- 40-50% embrace the MAHA agenda as a priority in their political considerations.
The GOP’s base has long distrusted government overreach, particularly in areas of personal liberty. This aligns MAHA's stance on health mandates, distrust of the CDC and FDA, and the fight against Big Pharma.
Kennedy’s position on vaccine mandates resonates with the anti-establishment MAGA base, which has long prioritized individual autonomy. This presents a real opportunity for the GOP to incorporate health policies which could solidify support from previously disparate voter groups.
The Hybridization of Republican Ideals
MAHA has the potential to marry traditional Republican values with a health approach that appeals to progressives. While some conservatives are wary of Trump’s moderate and progressive-leaning stances, there is an overlap in health which seems palatable across ideological lines.
Republican and Independent Enthusiasm
- MIG Reports data suggests 50-70% of Republicans and Independents overlap in their views and engagement toward MAHA.
Voters who are looking for common-sense policies that transcend partisan divides can come together under a health umbrella. For the GOP, this hybrid platform seems to be attracting new voters which are otherwise difficult to move.
21
Oct