On Aug. 6, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris announced Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate. Many voters speculate Harris’s strategy was aimed at solidifying support with voters in the Midwest. Democrats are emphasizing both progressive and moderate credentials to appeal across the party’s spectrum.

MIG Reports data shows headwinds for Harris in the three days following Walz’s announcement as the Democratic VP pick:

• Harris continues to lose ground nationally against Donald Trump
• Walz’s individual support dropped from leading J.D. Vance by 3%, to trailing him by 1%.

Negativity Toward Gov. Tim Walz

On the ideological left, there is a limited amount of support for Harris-Walz. Leftists among these groups dissect Harris's campaign decisions for their shaky alignment with progressive values. Progressives express skepticism about her commitment to systemic change, often pointing to her past as a prosecutor and her perceived establishment ties.

Democrats and progressives who approve of Walz express hope that he can strengthen Harris’s appeal to rural and Midwestern voters while reinforcing progressive policies. However, this hope seems largely negated by voter sentiment in Midwest states like Wisconsin.

• Despite an initial boost on Aug. 6, Kamala Harris’s approval in Wisconsin has since dropped to net -1% relative to her support prior to adding Walz to the ticket.
• In Ohio, Harris saw a 4% bump with her VP announcement, which dropped back down to 46% in the following days.
• Similarly in Michigan Harris has not held her VP bump, dropping back down from 49% on Aug. 6 to 47% today.

Moderates and centrists are a challenge for Harris, creating a need to prevent herself from being perceived as far-left. Critical issues like the economy, border, and national security draw sharp negativity from important voter groups.

Despite the Harris campaign attempting to frame Walz as a moderate who appeals to both progressives and centrists, MIG Reports data shows online sentiment is predominantly negative. The campaign’s framing effort is often met with skepticism and outright rejection. Dissatisfied voters are quick to highlight Walz’s record as extremely far left.

Many Midwestern voters also highlight geographic and cultural rifts. They claim coastal democrats have misunderstood Midwestern moderates. They view Walz’s policies as reshaping Minnesota into a facsimile of California's liberal agenda. This comparison highlights growing divides on the left between far left progressives and moderate and blue-collar Democrats.

Top issues causing negativity toward Walz include:

• Walz role in allowing and possibly abetting BLM riots in Minneapolis in 2020
• His position on transgender issues and child sex-change surgeries
• Concerning ties Walz has with China and travel there as a teacher
• Widespread allegations of stolen valor
• His extremely progressive immigration policies
• Walz’s poor fiscal record of government over-spending in Minnesota
• His stringent enforcement of 2020 COVID lockdowns

National approval for Walz has been volatile in the last month. In mid-July, Walz saw approval highs of 48% and a low of 37%.

• Since being chosen as the Democratic VP candidate, Walz's approval has dropped from 49% to 46%.
• A month ago, online mentions of Tim Walz only averaged 38 per day. With his announcement as Harris’ running mate, mentions spiked to 23,936, dropping back to around 10,000 in the following days.

Voter Group Reactions

Democrats

Among Democrats, many highlight Tim Walz's legislative achievements and progressive credentials. Proponents celebrate his moves to provide universal free school meals, legalize cannabis, enact carbon-free electricity mandates, and establish paid family leave policies.

Walz's supporters argue his executive experience and progressive policies align with Kamala Harris's vision for America. They spotlight his efforts in sectors like education, climate change, and healthcare.

National Democratic figures like Nancy Pelosi and David Axelrod have defended Walz, indicating his acceptance among influential party members. However, these support pillars do not translate to more moderate Democratic voters.

Moderate Democrats express concern about Walz’s progressive track record. They worry about the backlash against his handling of BLM protests and his controversial COVID "snitch line." Walz's advocacy for defunding police and support for youth gender surgeries also alienates centrist Democrats in swing states who view these policies as too radical.

Republicans

Predictably, Republican and conservative voters are sharply critical of Walz. They decry his role during BLM protests in Minnesota, accusing him of allowing riots and chaos. Conservatives view Walz as overly radical, emphasizing his ties to socialist policies and his progressive stance on LGBTQ issues.

Republicans suggest Walz solidifies a leftward shift on the Democratic ticket. This, they argue, is contrary to the values of mainstream America.

Much of the discourse among Republicans—with growing media acknowledgement—outlines allegations of repeated stolen valor by Walz. Evidence has emerged that Wal retired from the National Guard to avoid deployment and misrepresented his rank and service record. This scandal elicits strong negativity from veterans, voters who value support for the U.S. military, and moderate demographics who emphasize valor and honor in service.

Independents and moderates

Some Independents appreciate Walz's tangible policy achievements and his Midwestern roots. They hope this can help the Democratic ticket gain traction in critical swing states. However, support among those who would have appreciated Walz's military background wavers with more information about his alleged stolen valor.

Many are also concerned about how he managed 2020 protests and view his policies as too extreme. His COVID lockdown policies also generate disapproval—especially in discussion about creating a "snitch line" to report anyone violating lockdown orders. These are major sticking points for moderates and Independents, could jeopardize support.

Geographic Voter Groups

Geographically, the reaction to Walz varies. In Minnesota and neighboring Midwestern states, his candidacy elicits strong responses, both positive and negative. These regions have witnessed his governorship firsthand, causing many to express dissatisfaction.

In contrast, coastal states inclined towards more progressive policies seem to respond more favorably to Walz. They align with progressive values but believe Walz could shore up moderate appeal.

In traditionally conservative regions, especially the South and parts of the Midwest, criticism reigns. These regions frame Walz’s policies as emblematic of excessive government intervention and radicalism.

• In swing states, Walz does not meaningfully boost Kamala Harris’s support.
• Since Walz’s announcement as VP pick, Kamala Harris has lost ground against Donald Trump in swing states, going from a 50%-46% Trump lead to 52%-44%.

Voters commenting on the Senate race in Wisconsin between Democratic incumbent Tammy Baldwin and a soon-decided Republican challenger are mostly discussing the economy and establishment politics.

Republican challenger Eric Hovde is the favorite to win the GOP Senate primary on Aug. 13. With the economy and immigration two of the top voter issues, MIG Reports data indicates Hovde leads Baldwin with 52% support to Baldwin’s 48% as of Aug. 9.

Against this backdrop, conversations among Wisconsin voters focus on:

• The impact of illegal immigration on the economy
• Workers whose jobs are being threatened by competition from migrants
• Jobs threatened by changes in certain industries
• Anti-establishment sentiments among Wisconsinites

Establishment Workhorse vs Outsider

Baldwin's political career started in 1986 when she was 24. She served six consecutive terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, prior to her Senate election win in 2012. Her political career has been almost as long as President Joe Biden’s, roiling the growing number of anti-establishment voters.

Baldwin is strongly aligned with progressive values and the Biden-Harris administration, voting with them 95.5% of the time. This is a prominent theme generating criticism from those who are unhappy with national politics.

Critics link her to social and economic woes like:

• Rising costs from inflation
• Homelessness
• The decline of American cities
• Concerns about international conflicts
• Rampant illegal immigration
• Drug addiction and deaths

Voters also criticize her for being disconnected from her constituents. They see her lifestyle and financial interests as an indication she favors the wealthy over the working-class. Wisconsin’s economic situation is another focal point, with mixed opinions on Baldwin’s role in recent manufacturing gains and broader economic trends.

In contrast, Eric Hovde is seen as a political outsider bringing "fresh perspective" and "new ideas." He appeals to voters who are disillusioned with traditional politics. Many view Hovde's lack of establishment ties as an advantage. They say it allows him to challenge the status quo and offer innovative solutions.

Hovde's anti-establishment stance, emphasizing independence, anti-corruption, and reform, resonates with many Wisconsinites. They want to disrupt political cronyism and inefficiency, looking to Hovde for greater transparency and accountability.

Economic Pain for Wisconsinites

Inflation is a prominent topic as voters criticize government spending and economic policies. Wisconsinites express concerns about the rising cost of living, specifically citing high prices for essentials such as gas and groceries. Some blame the Biden-Harris administration for uncontrolled spending that exacerbates inflation. Others argue inflation is a global issue not solely impacted by domestic policies.

Sentiment toward Eric Hovde leans positive on the economy. Conversations are growing about his passion for building homes for families and children in need. Many see this as positive and relatable for those facing economic hardship. There is some skepticism of Hovde’s background in finance, though many see it as a positive. They appreciate his return to Wisconsin despite living an affluent life in southern California.

Voters also talk about taxes, debating the implications of tax cuts and increases. More conservative voters advocate for tax cuts to stimulate the economy and reduce financial strain on families. Left leaning voters call for higher taxes on the wealthy and large corporations to address fiscal deficits and income inequality.

Sentiment Trends and Voter Impact

On inflation and tax evasion scandals, sentiment is extremely negative. People are frustrated with current economic policies and political figures they view as corrupt. This coincides with wider anti-establishment sentiment in Wisconsin. Voters want tax cuts, deregulation, and fiscal conservatism to combat economic challenges.

Undecided and moderate voters seem particularly influenced by discussions about practical economic impacts. Concerns about day-to-day expenses, fairness in taxation, and financial transparency are central to their decision-making process. These voters display a tendency to seek balanced and pragmatic solutions, rather than extreme partisan positions.

Inflation and taxes have sustained voter attention over time as fundamental concerns. Temporary spikes in discussion often occur around specific events or revelations, such as scandals involving financial misconduct by candidates. However, these spikes tend to increase a consistently high discussion volume.

State of GDP

In 2024, Wisconsin's manufacturing sector remains the largest contributor to GDP, generating $55.19 billion, but is experiencing a decline of 1.3%. The real estate and rental and leasing sectors follow, contributing $38.39 billion with minimal growth of 0.2%. Healthcare and social assistance is grew 1.6%, contributing $32.02 billion, reflecting increased demand for healthcare services.

High-growth sectors include:

• Professional, scientific, and technical services: 6.3% growth rate
• Arts, entertainment, and recreation: 11.3% growth rate, likely due to a post-COVID rebound

Challenges are evident in sectors like finance and insurance. These face a significant decline of 1.7%, potentially due to regulatory changes or market saturation. Wholesale trade is also experiencing a decline of 1.0%, likely influenced by broader economic trends impacting supply chains.

Employment Sector Trends

The employment landscape in Wisconsin is diverse, with healthcare and social assistance employing 450,155 people, modest 0.2% growth. Manufacturing employs 446,288 people but is experiencing a slight decline of 0.3%. Retail trade, with 392,305 employees, is growing by 0.9%.

Key growth sectors include:

Administration, Business Support, and Waste Management Services:

• Employs 215,582 people
• Significant growth of 2.9%

Transportation and Warehousing:

• Employs 195,575 people
• Growth of 2.3%

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services:

• Employs 172,697 people
• Growth of 2.3%

Information:

• Fastest-growing sector at 4.0%
• Employs 93,381 people

Sectors like accommodation and food services (239,268 employees) and construction (156,524 employees) are seeing slight declines. The finance and insurance sector is also down by 0.4%, despite employing 171,785 workers. Other services (except public administration) and wholesale trade show minimal changes, with growth rates of -0.6% and 0.6%, respectively.

Prioritizing Party Over Posterity

Wisconsin voters are also concerned about family issues like education. They discuss the need for increased funding and better resources for schools, saying this is essential for high-quality education. However, the public is divided on the best way to achieve these goals.

Eric Hovde has approval from those supporting local control and accountability. His outsider status and focus on reform resonates with voters who believe fresh ideas and local leadership are crucial to addressing education challenges.

Hovde's approach contrasts sharply with Tammy Baldwin’s, whose support for COVID lockdowns draws criticism. People say she approved of destroying social cohesion, the economy, and children's education. Her alignment with broader government intervention is criticized by those who feel these measures exacerbate existing problems.

Lockdowns Damaged Education

Many criticize Baldwin and other pro-lockdown politicians for dealing a significant blow to education. They point out COVID restrictions negatively impacted academic proficiency among Wisconsin students. There were significant declines in both English Language Arts (ELA) and Math.

Pre-COVID proficiency levels in ELA and Math were 42.4% and 43.8%, respectively, in 2018.These figures dropped sharply post-2020, hitting a low of 33.7% for ELA and 33.6% for Math in 2021.

Although proficiency partially recovered by 2023, reaching 39.2% in ELA and 41.1% in Math, these levels remain below pre-COVID standards. Lockdowns exacerbated existing achievement gaps related to race and socioeconomic status. This created an urgent need for targeted interventions to support recovery and close these disparities.

MIG Reports data shows Kamala Harris faces a major challenge in solidifying her political identity. The task becomes even more complex after choosing Tim Walz, who represents a leftward shift, as her running mate. Opinions vary widely as Harris navigates her campaign's ideological positioning. This brings into question whether she can successfully appeal to a far-left base without alienating moderate Democrats and Independent voters. 

Polarizing issues which are important to critical voter groups create a chasm Harris and Walz must bridge to avoid seeming extreme to moderate and independent voters. Support weakens if swing state voters believe the Democratic stance includes: 

• Open borders 
• Increased crime and decreased policing 
• Socialist policies 
• Greater economic instability 
• Fracking bans 
• Gun confiscation 
• Healthcare for illegal immigrants 

Many voters are eager for the Harris campaign to clarify her positions on these issues, often expressing frustration at the lack of detailed platform thus far. 

Walz Pushes Harris Left 

Discussions also delve into the political implications of Harris's VP pick, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. Many in swing states view the Harris-Walz ticket as intentionally doubling down on progressive values to galvanize the liberal base. Critics see it as a potential misstep that alienates moderate voters.  

The debate over their ideological stance often refers to broader issues such as family values, economic policies, national security, and systemic social changes. This polarization is further fueled by contrasting opinions on the impact of progressive policies on America's safety, economy, and overall direction. 

Supporters seem to unify against the perceived threat of Donald Trump rather than enthusiasm about a Harris-Walz administration. Advocates assert their eagerness to "save democracy" from Donald Trump, who has been characterized in media as an autocratic strongman. They emphasize the stakes and urgency felt by many Democratic voters. 

It seems Harris has a difficult tightrope to walk in appealing to different voter groups with conflicting values. Opposing groups include: 

• Leftist progressives versus moderates 
• Pro-Israel versus pro-Hamas Democrats 
• Rule of law versus “Defund the police” voters 
• Identity politics versus advocates of meritocratic policies 

Swing State and Moderate Voters 

Many moderates and Independents have difficulty pinning down Harris's policy platform. There is a sense of frustration with the perception that she often speaks in generalities rather than clarifying detailed policy proposals. This sentiment is echoed in comments asking Harris to list her specific positions and proposed actions on major issues. 

Gun control and abortion are two topics that polarize swing state voters. Harris's stance on gun confiscation scares moderates who support the Second Amendment. However, abortion tends to gain more approval in swing states. 

In general, the Harris-Walz ticket gains greater support nationally than in critical swing states. This suggests, as of August, Kamala Harris has not yet shored up support needed for critical electoral votes. 

• On six polarizing issues including the border, the economy, national security, crime, abortion, and protests, Harris averages 3.5% lower approval in swings states. 
• The largest approval disparities are on the border and the economy, averaging -4.9% and -4.8% in swing states compared to nationally. 

Historical Contradictions Unsettle Voters 

Harris's history of policy shifts also lead to perception among moderates and Independents that she is politically opportunistic or adaptable, depending on her audience.  

Specific issues like her previous support for the Green New Deal versus aligning with broader climate and energy policies under the Biden administration illustrate the malleable nature of her positions. Many view this as a sign of inconsistency or lack of core principles.  

Kamala’s flip-flops on issues like illegal immigration, prosecuting crime, and gun control drive significant debate. On immigration, discussions often refer to her shift from supporting a 2008 policy in San Francisco that reported undocumented juveniles to ICE. This contradicts her current stance on decriminalizing border crossings and advocating for taxpayer-funded healthcare for undocumented immigrants, which Walz implemented in Minnesota. Other similar policy inconsistencies cause swing state voters to question her consistency and authenticity. 

Voters are increasingly concerned about Kamala Harris's lack of clarity on policy positions. Multiple sources comment on the absence of explicit policy goals on her campaign website, suggesting an underlying apprehension about her and Walz’s ability to address pressing national issues. Many say she has a phantom platform which emphasizes vibes over policy. They say it is an effort to redirect voters away from far-left policies they would not support.

These critiques often dovetail with broader accusations of the Democratic Party's manipulation and control over political processes. Many Americans believe Democrats impose undue influence from party elites and operatives.

A dominant thread in these conversations is the portrayal of both Harris and Walz as adherents to radical leftist ideologies. Phrases such as "socialism," "communism," and "far-left" continually emerge, reflecting public concern over their progressive stances.

Critics argue Harris and Walz embody a dangerous liberal agenda which must be obfuscated as it dismantles traditional American values.

Problematic Histories for Harris-Walz

Many voters point out both Harris and Walz having track records checkered with extreme leftwing positions. They criticize past statements and actions from both candidates advocating for radically progressive policies.

However, this sense of historically radical viewpoints becomes less clear to many voters who are unable to ascertain current Democratic platform positions. The candidates’ silence about what they are running on feels, to many, like a refusal to acknowledge their own leftist histories.

Republican VP candidate J.D. Vance pointed out the fact that Kamala Harris has made very few unscripted appearances and taken no questions from the press. This garnered attention online from Americans who find the lack of substance from Harris-Walz concerning.

I thought the reporters traveling with Kamala might be a little lonely given that she never answers questions from them, so I figured I’d come say hello and check out my new plane while I was at it. https://t.co/OPEh0UKBDc

— JD Vance (@JDVance) August 7, 2024

Many also point out allegations against Walz of stolen valor—a question he ignored from reporters in a recent public appearance.

REPORTER: Your response to allegation of stolen valor?

WALZ: *ignores*

REPORTER: Your response to allegation of stolen valor!?

WALZ: *runs away* pic.twitter.com/el3sPGDYuM

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) August 7, 2024

Another prominent complaint voters lodge against the Democratic candidates is the issue of George Floyd protests in 2020. Critics claim Walz intentionally mismanaged Minneapolis protests, allowing and even condoning chaos and destruction. They also assert that Kamala Harris fundraised to bail protesters out of jail.

Voter ire also extends to Harris-Walz's opaque positions on:

• Immigration
• Law enforcement
• Gender policies
• Energy reform
• Foreign policy

Detractors say Harris and Walz both sympathize with extreme positions which are socially and economically destabilizing. These claims are paired with the current uncertainty as to what the Harris-Walz platform actually does advocate for.

Leftists Pencil in Their Own Views

Meanwhile, Democratic supporters celebrate the lack of clarity on Harris-Walz policy positions. They seem willing to fill in uncertainty with their own progressive viewpoints, hopeful of ushering in an era of leftist reforms and DEI initiatives.

Here, terms like "progressive," "equity," and "solutions" echo a counter-narrative that Kamala Harris and Tim Walz provide a necessary counterbalance to conservative agendas. Proponents underscore Walz's practical appeal, saying he’s relatable in his Midwestern resilience, complementing Harris's national political stature.

Progressives say Harris relies on charm and relatability without needing to explicitly outline substantive policy discourse. They praise her trendy appeal, especially among young people who either hold far-left views or lack their own conviction.

Vibes and Crowd Size

With recent campaign rallies, Harris supporters draw attention to crowd sizes compared to Trump's rally turnouts. This comparison tends to be used as a measure of support and enthusiasm among attendees. People use phrases like "electric energy" and "packed arena" reflecting positive engagement at events.

Supporters also emphasize impeccable vibes and tone over policies. They focus on the joyful and enthusiastic atmosphere at Harris’s rallies, marked by chants of "USA, USA, USA." This they compare to allegedly more personality-driven chants of "Trump, Trump, Trump" at MAGA rallies. This distinction attempts to position Harris as one that, ostensibly, aligns with national unity over individual glorification.

Critics paint the campaign as "meme-driven," accusing Harris of falling back on pop culture figures and influencer clout to compensate for lack of political support. This group accuses Harris of astroturfing social media influence, drawing crowds with performers like Megan Thee Stallion, and receiving assists from the media to inflate perceptions of support.

Skeptics say the Harris-Walz campaign utilizes emotion over substance to fill the gaps left by a lack of transparency in policy. Discussions involve terms like "radical left regime," and skepticism about her ability to manage the country effectively. People question her competence in light of an overly caricatured profile currently being promoted by Democrats and the media.

Vice President Kamala Harris’s opaque messaging on policy positions is becoming a point of concern for moderates and Independents. Voter groups like Democrats, Independents, and undecideds will be critical in the 2024 election. How they perceive Kamala Harris’s platform between now and the election will inform their view of her as potential president.

Liberals see her as a progressive leader who will push the country further left, generally supporting the Party candidate no matter what. Moderates are cautious about her policies, worrying the left is correct and wondering about the implications for traditional values and national stability.

• Sentiment toward Harris compared to Trump varies by topic. In the last day, the highest volume discussion topics show Harris low on inflation and border security. 
• Both Trump and Harris have strong approval regarding campaign rallies, presumably from each of their support bases.
• The current economy and border security have not been emphasized in conversations about Trump in the last day, however he sees negativity regarding allegations against him by Democrats.

Ideologies

Liberals see Kamala Harris as a champion of progressive ideals, often highlighting her support for workers' rights, social justice, and climate action. They praise her advocacy for labor unions and perceive her as representing average citizens against elites like Donald Trump. However, some liberals criticize her for not pushing far enough on certain progressive issues like economic equality and healthcare reform.

Moderates often view Harris as leaning too far left, associating her with socialist policies and expressing concern about her potential impact on traditional American values. They are wary of her support for universal healthcare and progressive reforms, fearing these might lead to increased government control.

Discussions about her Jamaican and Indian heritage also play a role. Some question her authenticity while others acknowledge her diverse background as a potential strength.

Security Issues

Liberals generally support Harris's diplomatic approach to security issues, appreciating her efforts to address systemic causes of migration and reduce global tensions. They praise her for securing prisoner releases and engaging in international diplomacy but may criticize her for not going far enough in reforming law enforcement.

Moderates express significant concern about Harris's ability to handle national security issues. They perceive her foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, as inconsistent, leading to distrust. They also associate her with the "defund the police" movement and fear increased crime under her administration.

Economic Issues

Liberals support Harris's economic policies, particularly her focus on climate action, job creation, and reducing inequality. They view her role in passing legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act as a positive step toward economic reform. However, they may want her to be more aggressive in challenging corporate influence and wealth inequality.

Moderates are critical of Harris's economic approach, often blaming her for contributing to inflation and economic instability. They express concern about fiscal irresponsibility and the potential burden on the middle class, fearing higher taxes and government spending under her policies.

Border Security

Liberals view Harris's border security policies as a humane approach to immigration reform. They support her efforts to address the root causes of migration and dismantle Trump-era policies. They praise compassion for illegal immigrants, emphasizing their right to migrate. However, some may criticize her for not being more proactive in pushing for comprehensive reform.

Moderates are furious with Harris's border security legacy, frequently criticizing her role as "Border Czar." They blame her for unchecked illegal immigration and massive security risks. They view her policies as both lenient and enabling to criminals looking to enter the country. Many also have harsh words for the apparent disregard for cartel activity and drug and child trafficking.

Worries about border failures are exacerbated by candidate Harris and her recent VP pick Tim Walz seeming to completely ignore child trafficking issues in favor of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Immigration Issues

Liberals generally support Harris's immigration policies, praising her focus on humane treatment and systemic reform. They appreciate her advocacy for migrant rights but may call for more decisive action against restrictive immigration policies.

Moderates criticize Harris's immigration stance as overly lenient, associating her with increased illegal immigration and national security concerns. They express frustration over her halting deportations and call for stricter controls and decisive actions to curb illegal immigration.

Following Joe Biden’s sudden withdrawal from the presidential election, media outlets and Democrats have been working hard to position VP Kamala Harris as a formidable challenger to Donald Trump for president. At this early stage in her campaign, many are unclear on how robust her support will be on election day. MIG Reports data on head-to-head comparisons of Trump versus Harris after the first few days of her campaign suggests it may be an uphill battle for Democrats, despite presumably successfully ousting their nominee.

• The day after Biden’s withdrawal, Kamala Harris mentions regarding the presidential election surpassed mentions of Trump 25,000 to 24,000, but subsequently dropped.
• Approval for Harris as the presidential candidate also initially surpassed trump 49% to 44%. But in the following days the gap narrowed to only two points as Trump gained and Harris dropped.
• The percentage of support for Harris versus Trump shows them both at 47% nationally, but Trump has a slight edge in swing states with 49% support to Harris’s 46%.

Kamala Harris

The Youth Vote

Younger voters show a degree of skepticism toward Kamala’s nomination, expressing apprehensions about the transparency of the process. The adherence to procedural democratic norms is crucial for this group, and any deviation triggers calls for more open, participatory processes within the party.

Phrases like "party elites choosing," "delegate process," and "open convention" signify a pushback from segments of the Democratic base who feel their wishes were bypassed. These detractors worry anointing Harris without broader grassroots input may alienate certain voter groups, potentially impacting turnout and enthusiasm in the general election. These themes also seem to counter media claims that Harris's viral "brat summer" influence may not be completely genuine.

Some young progressives show enthusiasm for Harris's liberal stance and representation, marking her as a candidate who symbolizes progressivism and memes. However, the far left of this demographic has concerns that Harris will not push the policy boundaries as far as they desire.

Geography

In battleground and swing states, there is pointed concern about Harris’s ability to capture the critical moderate and Independent vote essential for the general election. Democratic sentiment from these critical regions suggests a mix of cautious acceptance and pragmatic support, recognizing the necessity of a strong candidate to counter Trump's influence.

In Democratic strongholds and among “chronically online” voters, there is a pronouncement of excitement for Kamala’s quirky appeal. This demographic also appreciates her diversity.

Swing states and red states especially criticize Harris on immigration issues and economic concerns. Many polls, and MIG Reports data, show Harris trailing Trump in important states like Pennsylvania where she faces a 46% to 48% deficit.

Key Issues for Harris

Intra-Party Disagreements

Some in the Democratic base focus on her past prosecutorial actions, saying she aligns too closely with the Establishment. Their disillusionment is compounded by the idea that she was “installed” by leaders rather than elected. This is a particular sore point for progressives who felt unfairness over Democratic leaders pushing Bernie Sanders out.

Black Lives Matter progressives have also expressed dissatisfaction, demanding an open primary to allow for public participation in the nomination process. They say Harris’s ascent to the top of the ticket sidesteps true democratic engagement.

Many bring up Harris's historical campaign performance, revisiting her 2020 presidential bid and noting she dropped out before any primary votes were cast. This fuels skepticism about her electability and support base.

The Economy

There is deep frustration from most Americans about the possibility of Harris continuing Biden’s economic policies. People talk about jobs, high inflation, gas prices, and expensive groceries, describing their own economic struggles.

Critiques often link Harris directly to deepening economic woes, highlighting a belief that her policies will continue to exacerbate everyday financial burdens. Voters also emphasize concerns over rising national debt and deficit spending, which they associate with increased inflation rates and economic instability.

Border Security

The U.S. border is also a deep concern aggravating Harris’s negative sentiment. Voters discuss record illegal border crossings and increased economic strain with Harris as “border czar.” People attribute the border crisis to policy failures under her watch. Many on the right also highlight the fact that mainstream media outlets are now attempting to deny Harris’s role as border czar.

Harris’s past actions as a prosecutor and her handling of immigration issues are frequent focal points of dissatisfaction, painting her as ineffective and incompetent. There is also significant disdain for her actions regarding President Biden as people accuse her of covering up Biden’s declining health.

Israel-Hamas Conflict

Supporters and critics alike mention her decision not to attend Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s address to Congress. Most view it as aligning more with pro-Palestinian sentiments than with Israel.

Many comments accuse Harris of giving Hamas a “PR victory.” This perception worsened by her prioritizing meetings viewed as less significant, such as with a sorority group. At the same time, pro-Palestine progressives express dissatisfaction toward the Biden-Harris administration for giving too much support to Israel.

Generally, voters worry about Harris’s ability to manage other sensitive international security issues like the Ukraine-Russia war. People say she offers limited experience in foreign affairs, questioning capacity to handle global security challenges effectively.

Donald Trump

The Youth Vote

Young voters from 18-25 present an interesting demographic for Trump. Many display a profound disillusionment with conventional politics. While much of this demographic expresses disdain for Trump's policies and demeanor, they also seem to dislike Kamala.

Online conversation suggests skepticism toward Trump, with terms like “misogynist” and “racist” frequently mentioned in discussions about his actions and rhetoric. Harris, while facing critiques from the left on her prosecutorial past, resonates more positively with themes of inclusion, diversity, and progressive change.

Younger conservatives, a growing cohort, view Trump as a strong, non-conformist leader, with comments lauding his boldness and critique of the current administration's policies. Supporters in this age group emphasize Trump's promise to restore economic stability, pointing to lower inflation and job opportunities during his tenure.

There is also a noticeable trend among young liberals and Independents who question Trump’s image as a hostile figure. The sentiment "President Trump doesn’t think young people are stupid" surfaces, suggesting a disconnect in how leftists and the media portray young people.

Geography

Trump commands a significant following in rural and certain suburban areas, particularly in the South and the Midwest. Here, voters appreciate his economic policies and business acumen. Urban centers and coastal regions typically support Harris.

Areas with robust manufacturing or energy sectors tend to view Trump’s deregulations and economic policies more favorably. Urban regions heavily affected by tariff retaliations express stronger disapproval.

Key Issues for Trump

Economy and Inflation

A consistent theme favoring Trump centers on his administration keeping inflation low, implementing tax cuts, and maintaining a secure and prosperous economy. Many supporters tout the low inflation rates during his presidency, comparing them favorably to higher rates under the current administration.

Conversely, critics of Trump highlight issues such as the longer-term effects of his tax cuts. They argue cuts disproportionately favor the wealthy and increase the national deficit. Arguments against Trump often include supply chain and manufacturing issues during COVID.

Government Corruption

Many conversations express outrage and suspicion toward the federal agencies responsible for Trump's security. They are furious about the failure and neglect in protecting him during an attempted assassination.

People decry former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle as a symbol of broader systemic issues in government agencies, celebrating her resignation. The public's reaction emphasizes questions about the integrity and competency of federal agencies, with comments frequently accusing them of corruption and ineptitude.

Numerous conversations also speculate about conspiracy theories, proposing the assassination attempt was an "inside job" or part of a larger "deep state" maneuver against Trump. These theories are fueled by inconsistent or false statements made by government officials, reinforcing the perception of a cover-up or evasion.

Voter opinions of J.D. Vance's vice-presidential candidacy show hesitant hope, some skepticism, and direct criticism. Supporters laud his life story as emblematic of the American Dream. His rise from disadvantaged beginnings to the national political stage is seen as a testament to meritocracy.

Vance’s supporters are especially keen on highlighting his service in the Marines and his Ivy League education as accomplishments earned through hard work and determination. This narrative of individual effort resonates strongly with traditional American values of self-reliance and perseverance, giving cautious hope to those unfamiliar with Vance.

There are some who argue Vance's life story as a powerful counterpoint to criticisms of elitism within the political establishment. His rise from his socio-economic background situates him as an inspiring figure for many Americans dissatisfied with career politicians. This sentiment is compounded by comparisons to Kamala Harris, who many view as a DEI token.

However, many people also have concerns and sharp criticisms—especially when it comes to Vance’s tech ties.

• In the last 7 days, overall approval for J.D. Vance has hovered at or just below 50%.
• His approval on the economy fluctuates slightly but averaged 49% in the last week.
• Sentiment toward Vance on crypto has the highest high at 52%, but also the lowest low at 45%, likely due to lower discussion volume.

General Reaction to Vance’s Tech History

Public reactions to J.D. Vance's connections to Silicon Valley and the tech sector are mixed. There are supporters who are enthusiastic about the potential benefits of his connections. They say Vance's ties to Silicon Valley could drive innovation and economic growth. They also believe his relationships with tech giants may bring much-needed investment and expertise to various sectors, including education, infrastructure, and job creation.

Sentiment trends reveal deep concerns about economic and political power dynamics. The public repeatedly underscores that the middle class should not bear the burden of policies and systems that disproportionately benefit the wealthy elite. This discontent is amplified in the context of unions, with many feeling true advocacy for working-class interests is incompatible with benefiting from Silicon Valley's corporate wealth.

In contrast, there are individuals who view Vance’s background in the tech sector as potentially advantageous. There is cautious excitement about the possibility of having a candidate who understands the complexities and potential of technological innovation and its impact on the economy. They see Vance as a figure who can perhaps bring fresh, tech-driven perspectives to policymaking. This they hope will foster growth which can solve modern economic challenges with innovative solutions.

Public sentiment towards Vance is complicated by his perceived contradictions. Some voters applaud his narrative of rising from humble beginnings and attaining success, viewing it as a testament to the American Dream. However, this narrative is simultaneously criticized, with detractors accusing Vance of romanticizing his past while contradicting it through his political stances and elite connections.

Arguments Defending Vance

Americans seem generally disapproving of any perception of undue influence by wealthy individuals on politics. They also regularly express concerns over economic equity and fairness. Vance’s connections to Silicon Valley and his critiques of current economic policies elicit mixed reactions, ranging from support for his tech-oriented insights to strong disapproval of his financial backers and political rhetoric.

Despite general disapproval for wealth influencing politics, some Americans appreciate Vance for his rejection of traditional establishment politics within the Republican Party. They resonate with his "pro-union anti-corporate" rhetoric.

Hopefuls value what they see as his commitment to fighting corporate excesses and believe in his potential to rejuvenate the GOP with a blend of economic populism and cultural conservatism. These supporters tend to downplay or dismiss the negative characterizations, viewing them as media exaggerations meant to discredit a rising political figure who might disrupt the status quo.

Many supporters, tech enthusiasts, and crypto voters largely support Vance's commitment to clear cryptocurrency regulations. They appreciate his efforts to navigate the regulatory landscape, which they view as fraught with restrictive measures under current administration policies.

This group likes Vance's critique of the SEC's hardline enforcement tactics, which they believe stifle innovation. His legislative proposals aiming to overhaul how the SEC and CFTC regulate crypto are seen as steps towards an environment more conducive to technological growth and investment.

Vance's personal involvement in the crypto sphere, evidenced by his Bitcoin holdings and public comments, amplifies his credibility among crypto voters—who are increasingly seen as an important voting group. His actions such as voting to repeal controversial accounting rules and opposing stringent tax reporting requirements demonstrate a deep understanding of the challenges faced by the industry.

Supporters like Vance’s comments on the utility of cryptocurrencies in circumventing government overreach. This is highlighted by his stance on the Canadian trucker protests and gaining traction with voters who value financial autonomy and limited government interference.

Negativity Toward Vance as VP

Vance's controversial stances and his connections with influential figures like Peter Thiel can also drum up disapproval. Critics believe there’s reason for concern and Vance may pose a significant threat to democratic norms.

This position has been emphasized heavily in public discussions, particularly following Liz Cheney’s sharp critique. Cheney's assertions that Vance would "overturn an election and illegally seize power" and "capitulate to Russia" resonate strongly with liberals and anti-Trump Republicans.

Vance also faces criticism from some Republicans and the media for his perceived hypocrisy and controversial positions. Some praise his alignment with former President Trump, but others use his past criticism of Trump as evidence of hypocrisy or a disingenuous power play.

The influence of Peter Thiel and other billionaires financing Vance’s campaigns generates contentious debate about the role of money in politics. Critics argue his backing fuels fears of oligarchic control over democratic processes. This sentiment suggests a widening economic and representational gap, intensifying the debate over campaign finance reform.

Concerns arise regarding the potential for a monopolistic tech landscape bolstered by politicians like Vance. Critics argue Vance’s tech ties and support from high-profile tech investors could perpetuate a monopolistic ecosystem where large corporations dominate, leaving little room for grassroots innovation.

On Monday, Kamala Harris made her first public appearance as the presumptive Democratic nominee for president after securing the delegates needed. It was also reported that she raised $81 million dollars within the first 24 hours of her campaign. However, some voice skepticism that reported “grassroots” enthusiasm is not being propped up by Democratic leaders and the media. MIG Reports data shows a sharp divide in public sentiment and reveals several key topics and trends.

The Establishment’s Candidate

Discussions focus on how rapidly Harris secured endorsements and delegates, emphasizing the notion of party machinery consolidating around her. Many discussions touch on swift leadership maneuvering to unite behind her campaign after President Biden's sudden exit.

People often bring up the fact that state Democratic Party delegations, such as those from California, New York, and Ohio, have unanimously endorsed her, propelling her closer to securing the nomination. Keywords like "Harris," "delegates," "endorsement," and "Democratic nomination" permeate discussion.

Some voters express frustration with the Democratic Party's internal dynamics. They accuse Party elites of unilaterally deciding the nominee and usurping the primary process. Views of "no primary votes necessary, just greed, corruption, and brute force," exacerbate the perception of a Democratic Party takeover by elites. Keywords like "elites," "donor money," "undemocratic," and "corrupt" highlight this unease with how the nomination is being orchestrated.

The lack of endorsement from former President Barack Obama and explicit support from other significant Democrats like Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who calls for an “open nominating convention,” inject complexities into the discourse. This suggests internal party contention and feeds speculation on Harris’s viability.

Sentiment Trends

There is excitement and enthusiasm among many Democrats who had begun to feel demoralized by Joe Biden’s prospect. Harris supporters interpret her fundraising success as a sign of strong voter enthusiasm. They highlight her historical candidacy, celebrating her potential to be the first biracial woman to lead a major-party ticket.

Endorsements from influential Democratic figures, such as Nancy Pelosi, and the swift backing by Democratic delegates, further boost positive sentiment.

On the other hand, there is significant skepticism and criticism. Detractors question her ability to win a general election against a formidable opponent like Donald Trump. Criticisms often focus on her past performance in the 2020 primaries, where she dropped out early, polling at just 3.4%. The backlash also stems from Harris's perceived alignment with the "establishment," causing some to feel disenfranchised by what they see as an undemocratic coronation process.

Vice President Kamala Harris's nomination as the presumptive Democratic candidate has stirred widespread and polarized discussions among undecided and Independent American voters. Online reflections show insights into what issues are resonating most strongly with the public and how their sentiments are moved by these political shifts.

Key Topics

Discussions regarding Harris's nomination include her qualifications, past political record, endorsements, her stance on international affairs concerning Israel, and her unserious public image. The former California Attorney General and current Vice President brings a complex political history that motivates both criticism and support.

The topics of her past prosecutorial record, her performance and dropping out of the 2020 Democratic primary, and her relationship with influential political figures like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, stir significant conversation.

Trending Topics

1. Trust and Credibility: Public discussions reveal a chronic struggle with trust in Harris's candidacy, driven by her past actions and perceived opportunistic alliances.
2. Democratic Process Integrity: Many conversations highlight a belief that the delegate-driven nomination process lacks true democratic spirit, raising fears about elitist overreach.
3. Foreign Policy and Ideological Stance: Harris’s international politics, particularly concerning Israel, exacerbates ideological divides within her own Party.

Sentiments diverge significantly based on these topics. For instance, Harris's prosecutorial record surfaces frequently, with some viewing her as experienced in law enforcement and others criticizing her for disproportionate incarceration rates among Black Americans. This discrepancy impacts voter sentiment broadly, influencing trust and support levels.

Anti-Israel and Pro-Palestine

One of the most contentious topics in the last few days has been Harris's refusal to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. This brings accusations of a "pro-Hamas" and "pro-terrorist" position from the potential new president.

The public split on this subject profoundly impacts sentiment. Supporters defend her stance as a sign of a balanced, critical perspective on Middle Eastern politics. Critics use it as evidence of anti-Israel bias, shaking the confidence of pro-Israel voters and sparking fears about perceived Democratic Party radicalism.

Professional Politician

The Harris campaign's swift move to secure endorsements and delegates after Biden's withdrawal injects both hope and cynicism into the public dialogue. Supporters see this maneuver as a necessary consolidation to maintain Party unity and enhance election efficacy, thus lifting sentiment. Critics, however, perceive it as undemocratic and manipulative, undermining faith in the electoral process, thus decreasing sentiment. Pelosi's subsequent endorsement of Harris, however, served to fan growing flames of enthusiasm among Democratic voters.

Another pivotal topic concerns her failure to secure primary delegates in past races. This argument surfaces frequently among detractors, framing her as an untested candidate lacking broad voter support, which dampens her acceptance among undecided voters. Many also argue he ascent to the candidacy is an affront to every Democrat voter who cast votes for Joe Biden.

Establishment’s Pick

Notably, the initial lack of endorsement from figures like Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi created an air of uncertainty in the immediate aftermath of Biden’s withdrawal. This image of Party disarray impacts voter sentiment variably. While some interpret it as a strategic move to prevent premature influence, others read it as a lack of full confidence, stirring unease. With

Financial backing and the role of influential figures like George Soros also come under scrutiny. Harris's significant war chest generates enthusiasm about her capacity to mount a robust campaign but also fuels skepticism about undue influence by wealthy donors and political elites, dampening trust among voters wary of corporate sway in politics.

Sentiment Trends

Increasing Sentiment

Expressions of Party unity, endorsements from key leaders like Pelosi and Obama affirming her leadership, and narratives highlighting her policy acumen and experience tend to increase sentiment. Positive engagement stems from the portrayal of Harris as a candidate capable of evolving and addressing deep-seated issues within the party and nationwide.

Decreasing Sentiment

Dialogues stressing undemocratic practices, her past prosecutorial record, perceived leftist radicalism, and negative comparisons with other potential candidates push sentiment down. These criticisms suggest reversing negative sentiment will require Harris addressing concerns about fairness, transparency, and her political record comprehensively.