MIG Reports analysis of voter opinions on the economy and who they trust more shows significant trust in Donald Trump compared to Kamala Harris. Despite positive media coverage and selective polling showing a Harris surge, MIG Reports data reveals a consistent skepticism toward Harris's economic policies. These sentiments are largely shaped by perceptions of inflation, government spending, and unhappiness with her economic management.

Vice President Kamala Harris is catching up to former President Donald Trump on the number of voters who trust her handling of the economy, according to a new Financial Times/Michigan Ross poll. https://t.co/v4P9A0zZWO

— NBC4 Washington (@nbcwashington) August 12, 2024

Axios reported on recent polling showing Harris leads Trump by 1% in voter trust on the economy. However, the limited poll of 1,000 voters over a selected period also has a margin of error greater than Harris’s supposed lead—± 3.1 percentage points. This not only brings the poll’s results into question but emphasizes the stark contrast of MIG Reports data and analysis.

• MIG Reports analysis shows Harris with mostly very negative sentiment regarding voter trust. Donald Trump shows mostly very positive and positive sentiment regarding voter trust.
• About 70% expresses negative sentiment towards Harris. Voters focus on inflation and government intervention.
• Approximately 60% of discussions favor Trump’s economic policies, viewing them as more effective in managing inflation and stimulating growth.

All Discussions similarly reflect widespread distrust in Harris's economic strategies. Around 70% voice concerns about her strategies for handling inflation. Many attribute rising inflation to government overspending and policy failures like the Inflation Reduction Act.

About 30% express support for her efforts, particularly in reducing prescription drug prices. However, overall sentiment remains heavily negative. Approximately 60% of discussions suggest a preference for Trump’s economic leadership, citing lower inflation rates and more favorable economic conditions.

In swing states, sentiment again prefers Trump. Around 72% of voters express skepticism about Harris’s ability to address inflation effectively, criticizing her economic policies as misguided or overly reliant on government intervention. About 55% suggest trust in Trump’s economic management, particularly his tax cuts and deregulation efforts. Swing state voters view them as stimulating growth and keeping inflation low.

In national discussions, approximately 68% are critical of Harris, with many linking her policies directly to rising inflation and economic instability. Only 12% of the comments express support for her economic strategies, substantiating the theme of failure to gain public trust. About 70% of national conversations express a belief that Trump’s economic policies were more favorable.

The aggregated analysis from these sources highlights a strong public preference for Trump’s economic policies over Harris's. Overall, 60-70% of discussions favor Trump's approach to economic management over Harris’s. This preference is driven by widespread distrust in Harris’s ability to manage inflation and economic stability. Voters view her policies as exacerbating economic challenges rather than alleviating them.

Why are Voters Skeptical?

Inflation and Price Controls

One of the most recurrent themes in voter discussions is inflation. Harris’s role in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is a major point of criticism. Americans place "inflation" in quotes to emphasize the perceived failure of the IRA to achieve its intended effects.

Harris's policies are also compared to communism, specifically referencing price controls, which people fear to lead to shortages, market chaos, or inflationary pressures. Many predict similar results to those in countries like Venezuela and Cuba. These terms are often used in a derogatory context to undermine Harris's credibility. People suggest her policies are out of touch with economic realities and historical lessons.

Corporate Greed and Government Control

Voters also discuss corporate greed and government control in discussions criticizing Harris's economic policy. Many decry Harris’s claim that rising prices are due to corporate greed and “price gouging.” They cite slim margins for large food retailers like Walmart—and many criticize Harris surrogates like Senator Elizabeth Warren who defend the “corporate greed” narrative.

Holy crap!

NBC had enough of Elizabeth Warren 🤣 pic.twitter.com/kDPEjyQD9H

— Brandon Tatum (@TheOfficerTatum) August 23, 2024

There is a strong belief that Harris’s policies, such as price controls and housing subsidies, could lead to more significant issues like market distortions, crashes, and black markets. These fears are bolstered by comparisons to failures in other nations which implemented similar strategies.

Tax Cuts and Job Creation

Discussions about Trump’s economic policies often invoke terms like "tax cuts" and "job creation." These terms highlight voter confidence in the successes of his administration in fostering economic growth. The comparison between Harris and Trump is stark, with many comments suggesting Trump's policies were more beneficial for the middle class.

Americans believe Trump’s policies kept inflation low and the job market strong. This comparison is often framed in a way that paints Trump’s economic record as more favorable. Many people underscore his achievements to contrast Harris’s perceived failures.

Inflation Reduction Act

The IRA is frequently mentioned, often with a tone of skepticism. Voters criticize Harris for her involvement in the Act, with the phrase placed in quotes to question its effectiveness. Critics argue that instead of reducing inflation, the Act has contributed to its rise, thereby undermining the very purpose of the legislation. This term is often juxtaposed with discussions of other economic issues, such as prescription drug prices and environmental initiatives, further highlighting the divide between the policy’s intentions and its perceived outcomes.

Prior to COVID lockdowns, religion played a significant role in the lives of many Americans. For Christians, Jews, Muslims, atheists, and others, religious beliefs or lack thereof often shape worldview, political leanings, and day-to-day decisions. The intersection of religion and politics, particularly for evangelical Christians, was a contentious issue pre-2020. Those who supported then-president Donald Trump were often criticized. This was especially true when his actions and attitudes seemed antithetical to evangelical beliefs.

COVID lockdowns brought about a shift in religious sentiment among Americans, however. With churches, synagogues, mosques, and other places of worship closing their doors by mandate, many turned to online platforms to practice their faith. This period of isolation and uncertainty also led to an increase in spiritual seeking for some, while others questioned their beliefs.

Lockdowns combined with the subsequent economic crisis brought about a shift in focus. Discussions around job creation, economic recovery, and the role of government in these areas became more prominent. Some religious individuals linked their faith to these civic issues, citing the importance of caring for God's creation – including the economy and the environment. 

Predictive Analysis Vs Mainstream Narrative

The future of religious people in America will likely continue to be influenced by political and social issues. The intersection of faith and politics, particularly for evangelical Christians, will likely remain a contentious issue. However, it is possible the results of COVID may be a shift in priorities, with more focus on social justice, environmental stewardship, and economic equality.

Factors that shape religious sentiment for Christians, Jews, Muslims, atheists, and others will likely remain diverse and complex. These may include personal experiences, societal trends, political climate, and interpretations of religious texts. The rise of online religious practice may also continue, altering the way Americans engage with their faith.

The impact of lockdowns on religion in America has been significant. It seems to have led to permanent changes in religious practice and sentiment. The future of religion in America is somewhat uncertain and will likely be influenced by many factors.

Mainstream media narratives suggest that Christianity, which has historically been the dominant religion in America, is waning. News reports point to decreased church attendance as an indicator of archaic ways of life receding into the past.

Mainstream reporting suggests demographic shifts such as increasing racial and ethnic diversity in America likely leads to increased religious pluralism. There is also a suggestion that secularization will continue to increase, particularly among younger generations who are less likely to identify with traditional religious institutions.

However, external data indicates this narrative does not tell the whole story and may actually be cynical. Some studies show an increase in younger generations attending church services.

• Non-white Millennials drive the largest increase in church attendance.
• 45% of non-white Millennials are attending church weekly, compared to 35% of white Millennials.

Percent Attending Church Weekly

Political dynamics may also shape the future of religion in America. The intertwining of religion and politics, particularly on the Christian right, could further polarize religious communities. Conservative Christians often find themselves at odds with the rise of social justice movements which prompt many faith communities to engage in activism and advocacy.

Technological advancements, from online worship services to religious apps, could transform how people practice their faith. These technologies may make religion more accessible to some. However, they also seem to be raising new questions about the nature of religious community and worship.

In terms of religious sentiment, various faiths continue to hold different views on morality, social justice, and the role of religion in public life. These differences are often shaped by theological beliefs, cultural backgrounds, and personal experiences.

For example, Christians may continue to grapple with issues like LGBTQ rights and racial justice, with different denominations and individuals having differing views. Jews and Muslims may continue to face challenges related to religious discrimination and prejudice, which could shape their religious sentiments and practices. Atheists, meanwhile, may continue to advocate for secularism and the removal of religion from government practices. 

Demographics and Mass Attendance

While Protestant numbers have decreased, Catholicism remains steady and may be trending upward. Furthermore, a possible resurgence of Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) attendees seems to be leading the potential increase. A survey conducted from 2019 to 2021 of TLM parishes across the country identified:

• 2019 average attendance across 59 parishes was 145.
• 2020 average attendance across 61 parishes was 163.
• January 2021 average attendance across 69 parishes was 174.
• June 2021 average attendance across 75 parishes was 196.

In short, the rate of TLM attendance increased by 34% and the number of parishes offering TLM increased by 27%.

“So, at a time when general Mass attendance was decreasing,” the report pointed out, “attendance at the TLM was dramatically increasing." Church attendance also differs among generations. However, this may be an indicator of continued increases in faith since Millennials are less likely than Boomers to stop attending church all together. They are, however, more likely to attend multiple churches.

The economy also seems to be an influencing factor, likely delaying family creation, as well as causing increased housing prices and other general costs of living. These hardships may be encouraging Americans back to faith.

Given difficult economic conditions and societal disillusionment being exacerbated by COVID lockdowns, searching for meaning is a plausible counterreaction to recent societal turmoil for many Americans. Despite the mainstream media's insistence to the contrary and negative portrayal of religiosity, many Americans are clinging to their faith.

Joe Biden's call to the media on December 23, 2023, to "start reporting it the right way", drove increased media coverage, MIG reports show. However, new White House messaging in the press has failed to resonate across the electorate. An increase in reporting from traditional media precipitated an increase in online discussion; however, not all media consumers are not buying White House job-creation or increased-GDP narratives compared with their experience. MIG data currently indicates overall dissatisfaction with the economy, with voters focusing on high taxes (specifically property taxes), younger professionals being unable to save and invest, and a general dissatisfaction with government spending decisions.

Democrats, however, were more likely to side with Biden, indicating a partisan split over the issue.

Democrats

• Perceive the media's reporting on the economy as overly negative or insufficiently informative.
• Argue that the emphasis on inflation and supply chain issues overshadows the accomplishments of the Biden administration, such as labor market gains since the COVID-19 pandemic wiped out employment growth during the Trump administration, and GDP growth.
• Strong Economy/Labor Markets:

• Democrats are more likely to believe narratives about labor and GDP growth signaling a strong economy, citing declining unemployment rates and robust job growth.

Republicans

• Largely skeptical of Biden's economic policies and the overall state of the economy
• View Biden's direct address to the press as an attempt to control economic narratives and downplay inflation and supply chain disruptions.
• Argue that the media should hold the administration accountable rather than drive narratives with White House talking points.
• Strong Economy/Labor Markets:

• Tend to disbelieve labor market and GDP narratives, pointing to inflation and supply chain disruptions, and arguing job growth under the Biden Administration has simply been a recovery of jobs lost during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Independents

• Often lean towards pragmatism over partisanship and show mixed responses.
• Some echo Democrats' views, others align more with Republicans or express broader skepticism towards media narratives.
• Strong Economy/Labor Markets:

• Independent voters appear split, with their beliefs indexing to their personal economic experiences and media they consume.

Messaging Analysis

Top Messages Increasing Biden’s Support:

• Highlighting job growth
• Emphasizing rebounding GDP
• Pointing out stock market performance
• Underscoring infrastructure investments
• Promoting the president’s Build Back Better plan
• Increased support for middle class and low-income families

Top Messages Decreasing Biden’s Support:

• Emphasizing inflation
• Highlighting supply chain disruptions
  
• Focusing on labor shortages
• Discussing increased government spending
• Criticizing his handling of the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic
• Perceived overspending
• Potential tax increases

Biden's call for the media to "report it the right way" and the press lining up to drive White House talking points further underscores the deep partisan divide in the perception of the president’s economic policies and voters’ sifting of their own direct experience. The influence of media narratives on these perceptions is significant, highlighting the need for balanced and accurate reporting. At the end of the day, voters will have to weigh personal economic outcomes against partisan narratives and will balance GDP and stock market growth against the quality of life they enjoy.

Economic Issues

The current dominant theme emerging from the data is concern over taxes and the quality-of-life Americans enjoy for their hard-earned dollars. Discussion especially centers around property taxes and their impact on both individuals and businesses. Sentiment analysis shows frustration, particularly in higher-tax states like New York, Illinois, and California. This dissatisfaction is driving a shifting population and investment in states with lower tax rates, referred to as "winner" states, many in the Sun Belt, such as Tennessee, Texas, and Florida.

Age and stage of life appears to influence attitudes towards taxes. Younger respondents, particularly those just starting out in their careers, express concern about their ability to save and invest due to high tax rates. Older respondents, particularly those who are property owners, express dissatisfaction with high property taxes.

Regionally, the data shows a clear divide. People in states with high taxes are expressing greater dissatisfaction and are considering migrating to states with lower taxes. The trend is particularly pronounced in New York, where people express concerns about crime, high cost of living, and perceived political targeting of investors, in addition to high taxes.

Politically, there seems to be a divide along party lines. Republicans express satisfaction with tax cuts or rebates in their regions, while Democrats criticize spending decisions, such as National Guard deployments to the southern border, which they believe could be better invested in solving tax and insurance issues. Still, immigration may yet come to bear on the economy in squeezing rent and housing inventory. Housing inventory remains exceedingly tight and prices high, keeping younger buyers from home ownership.  

Analysis shows general dissatisfaction with high taxes across different demographic groups, with more Americans examining their life opportunities and outcomes in the face of their tax burden. Dissatisfaction is reflected in shifting investment trends and migration patterns, which could have significant long-term impacts on regional economies and elections.