As the spotlight continues to shine on illegal immigration, many voters understand the problems of economic migrants impacting the economy, cartels bringing drugs into the country, and increased crime in sanctuary cities. But Americans are now starting to express fears of a larger, more global threats beyond Central and South American migrants and the cartels.

China’s Power is Growing

A lot of Americans are talking about China’s significant and increasing global power. Some argue that governments in Iran, Russia, Israel, America, NATO, and the European Union can all be bought by China – and may have already been bought. The perceived control of China over world affairs is a major concern.

Voters continually express apprehension about China's alignment with Russia, Iran, and North Korea. The potential for these alliances to result in terrorist activities or geopolitical instability is a recurring theme in the discussions. Americans sound increasingly alarmed at China’s potential threat to U.S. national security through the economy and illegal immigration.

As it relates to the border, more people are beginning to speculate that Chinese nationals are among the many illegal immigrants a truant U.S. government is allowing to stream into the country.

There are increasing fears about potential threats these illegal crossings pose from the Chinese government, including espionage, sleeper military cells, and other forms of interference.

Americans are concerned about the potential of military-age single men coming from China across the southern border for unknown but threatening purposes. There are speculations that an “invasion” is taking place not only by Central and South American migrants, but Chinese nationals and other antagonistic countries.

More and more Americans insist that the U.S. should prioritize its own security interests before international interests. They express frustration with what they see as inaction and incompetence by our country’s government.

U.S. Business and Politics in the Pocket of China

There is a significant and vocal segment of Americans who express suspicions that American politicians and corporations are being influenced by China.

Many people mention politicians like Gavin Newsom and Nikki Haley, and CEOs like Mark Cuban as supporters of open immigration policies and submission to China’s interests. Some accuse Haley of encouraging illegal immigration by promoting policies that benefit foreign companies, such as bringing the Chinese corporation Bluestar Silicones to South Carolina.

More and more, American voters express fears that the U.S. is being put economically, politically, and now possibly militarily at the mercy of China.

Some other concerns that often come up related to China’s influence in the U.S. include:

• Fears that China is buying vast amounts land across the country.
• Discussion of China’s use of technology and artificial intelligence for cyber warfare.
• Apprehension about China’s control over TikTok and its social surveillance.
• Talk about China’s potential to invade Tiwan as the U.S. sits idly by.

Sentiment toward China tends to be slightly higher among Democrats. Although, Republican sentiment has fluctuated slightly more in the last 15 days.

• The 15-day average sentiment toward China is 47% among Democrats and 46% among Republicans.

Overarching Border Fears Move Sentiment Prior to the Election

The conversation about China’s potential threat at the southern border is roiling under the surface of a larger illegal immigration conversation. A January Harvard CAPS / Harris poll showed that immigration surpassed inflation as the most important issue to American voters. MIG data confirms this poll with 30-day trending topic analysis.

• Border security generated more online discussion in the last 30 days than economic issues.
• Both border security and the economy are in the top five overall discussion topics.
• Average sentiment for border security is 45% compared to 46% for the economy.

Many voters are expressing outrage over the perceived misuse of their tax dollars, particularly when used to provide for illegal immigrants. Americans argue that their hard-earned money is being used to fund services and benefits for illegals, which they find unjust. This sentiment is particularly strong with recent news of New York City Mayor Adams' plan to provide $10,000 Debit Cards to undocumented immigrants.

More people are saying that increased crime and economic drain are top problems caused by unchecked illegal crossings. Instances of crime involving illegal immigrants are often highlighted when people advocate for stricter immigration control.

Discussion shows increasing resistance to the idea of amnesty for illegal immigrants, with some insisting that illegal entry should be penalized rather than condoned. The need to finish building a wall along the southern border is also commonly suggested.

Many voters criticize Biden for his ineffective handling of the border crisis and an unwillingness to act in the interest of Americans. Words like "invasion” and “infiltration” are being used more frequently. Voters repeatedly lament the growing strain on public resources, such as schools and social services. This coincides with existing concerns about the economy, rising costs, and unchecked government spending.

A final concern that many, especially Republicans and conservatives, vocalize is the potential political implications of continued open border. Americans worry about the influence of illegal immigrants on the electoral process, accusing Democrats of using the influx of potential new voters to secure votes.

Border sentiment is consistently lower among Republicans than among Democrats. However, negative discussion about the subject is widespread among all voter groups.

Analyzing the political climate in Brazil and understanding the reasons behind the popularity of Jair Bolosnaro and the unpopularity of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva requires a nuanced understanding of the socio-political dynamics of the country. Additionally, a key factor is the absence of a political race. Without a ballot box to decide on, all Brazilians can voice their discontent to the country’s current leader.

Head to Head - Bolosnaro and da Silva

Talking About - Bolosnaro and da Silva

Sentiment - Bolosnaro and da Silva

Bolosnaro

Jair Bolsonaro has gained popularity for several reasons. Firstly, his tough on crime stance resonates with a significant portion of the Brazilian population, who are tired of high crime rates and corruption. His commitment to reducing bureaucracy and promoting economic liberalization, which includes privatization of state-owned companies and reduction in state intervention in the economy, appeals to the business community and the middle class. Bolsonaro’s nationalist rhetoric, his commitment to traditional family values, and his stance against political correctness also appeal to a significant portion of the Brazilian populace. Furthermore, his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, despite international criticism, has found support among those who prioritize economic stability over stringent lockdown measures.

However, there are many factors that have led to a decrease in Bolsonaro's support. His perceived mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic, with Brazil having one of the highest death rates in the world, has led to widespread criticism. His environmental policies, particularly his handling of the Amazon rainforest fires, have been controversial both domestically and internationally. Furthermore, accusations of corruption and nepotism within his administration have led to decreased trust and support.

da Silva

As for Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, or Lula, his popularity has suffered due to a variety of factors. The largest among these is the corruption charges that led to his imprisonment, tarnishing his image and that of his Workers' Party. Despite overseeing a period of significant economic growth and implementing social programs that lifted millions out of poverty, Lula’s legacy has been overshadowed by the corruption scandal.

However, there are factors that still generate support for Lula. His social programs, including Bolsa Familia, continue to be popular among the lower income population. His ability to maintain economic stability during his tenure is also remembered positively. Furthermore, Lula maintains a strong base of supporters who see him as a victim of political persecution, and his recent legal victories have led to a resurgence of this support.

Holocaust Comments

Analyzing the Brazilian public's reaction to Lula's comments, it's clear that his statements have stirred up significant debate. Lula da Silva, President of Brazil, made a controversial comment comparing the situation in Gaza to the genocide committed by Hitler during the Holocaust. The comments have ignited a passionate response among Brazilians, with the public appearing to be sharply divided.

The narrative reveals that a significant portion of Brazilians agree with Lula, expressing their support for his stance on social media. They argue that Lula's comparison is valid, viewing the conflict in Gaza as a war between a well-equipped military and innocent women and children. These supporters believe that the Israeli government's actions toward Palestinians are akin to genocide, and they are not shy about voicing their opinions. They accuse Globo, a major Brazilian media outlet, of supporting genocide due to its perceived lack of critical coverage of the issue.

However, not all Brazilians agree with Lula's statements. His critics accuse him of trivializing the Holocaust by comparing it to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They argue that Israel has the right to defend itself and that Lula's comments cross a red line. This group believes that Lula's comments are harmful to the Jewish community and, in some cases, have even led to calls for his punishment.

It's important to note that the Israeli government has taken offense to Lula's comments, leading to a diplomatic strain between the two nations.

Lula's detractors accuse him of supporting terrorists and dictators, using the phrase "Lula é" followed by the names of organizations and leaders such as Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah, Maduro, and others. They argue that Lula is aligning Brazil with these entities, thereby endangering the country's international standing and potentially its safety. They call for Lula's impeachment, citing Article 5 of Law 1079/50, which prohibits acts of hostility against foreign nations that could lead Brazil to war or compromise its neutrality.

These critics also express their support for Israel and the Jewish people, condemning Lula's comments as anti-Semitic and rejecting his comparison of the situation in Gaza to the Holocaust. They argue that Lula is unfairly vilifying Israel while ignoring the actions of Hamas and other groups they view as terrorists.

In conclusion, Lula's comments have sparked a heated debate among Brazilians. While some agree with his comparison of the Gaza conflict to the Holocaust, others vehemently denounce his remarks. This difference in opinion among Brazilians underscores the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its global impact.

Impact to Support - da Silva

Donald Trump’s recent comments at a South Carolina rally on NATO and Russia sparked a media firestorm with some claiming Republicans are now doing damage control over national security issues. But new reports indicate swing state voters share the former president’s sentiment that NATO countries share the responsibility for buffering Russia.

Full Story

Speaking at a rally in Conway, South Carolina, President Trump recounted a conversation during his first term with an unnamed NATO leader. The former President told the crowd that he was asked what the U.S. would do if a NATO nation failed to uphold the alliance's mandatory two percent defense spending commitment. Trump’s reply: such a nation would have to confront the possibility of Russia acting with impunity.

Mainstream media and political elites were quick to decry Trump's remarks. President Biden criticized Trump's remarks as "un-American," a frequent knee-jerk against Trump, known for challenging establishment norms. Adding to the chorus, Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, expressed concern to NBC News that Trump’s comments would damage U.S. credibility among NATO countries.

Yet voters perceive the substance of Trump’s remarks: only 11 NATO nations meet NATO defense funding commitments, with 24 others falling short, despite the war in Ukraine being at NATO’s doorstep. Are President Trump’s stances on international issues in step with American sentiment?

Teflon Don

NPR reported that Republicans were playing “Clean Up on Aisle Trump,” in the wake of the former president’s comments. Yet The Media Intelligence Group, which analyzes social media data to provide AI-driven public sentiment insights, finds that Americans see nothing to clean up at all.

Nationally, Trump’s approval hasn’t budged since his NATO comments, standing at 47% in the seven days prior to his South Carolina rally and holding fast at 47% the following week.

Trump's ratings remained close to Biden's on issues relevant to NATO. Biden holds 47% to 46% for Trump on approval in online debates involving Ukraine, while Biden scores 48% on national security issues to Trump’s 46%.

Meanwhile the onslaught of negative press had no effect on Trump’s overall approval ratings.

Since the rally, Trump's ratings remain close to Biden's on NATO-specific discussions as well. Both Trump and Biden hold 47% approval in online debates involving Russia, while Biden scores 48% on National Security issues to Trump’s 47%. However, Biden faces difficulty in swing states over NATO and security issues.

Stronger Where it Counts, Swing States

Critically, within five days of Trump’s South Carolina rally, Trump retained his lead over Biden in head-to-head support in a majority of key swing states, indicating Trump may be in touch with voters in those states:

• AZ: Trump 48%, Biden 43%
• NV: Trump 48%, Biden 41%
• PA: Trump 47%, Biden 44%
• GA: Trump 47%, Biden 43%
• WI: Trump 44%, Biden 46%

Note: Includes independent candidate RFK Jr., sample size minimum of 1,000 respondents per candidate in each state.

Meanwhile, sentiment over the last seven days in Arizona, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Nevada, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida, Georgia, and Pennsylvania showed Biden trending down 3% on national security issues. Biden dipped to 40% compared to Trump’s 43%.

Biden remained only marginally higher on Russia, tracking at 45% to Trump’s 43%, a surprisingly close divide on a topic establishment media has sought to frame as an absolute negative for Trump since 2016. Meanwhile, Biden is losing his grip on Ukraine in swing state favorability, where Trump holds 44% approval to Biden’s 41%.

Forging Ahead

The episode typifies the political pattern that has emerged since Trump entered the political arena. Trump built a coalition confronting an entrenched Washington establishment, which in turn has attempted to characterize challenges to its agenda as a five-alarm fire. But is there a crisis? Americans outside the Beltway apparently either align with Trump’s America First outlook or reject media and establishment crisis narratives.

Swing state voters are instead weighing whether America’s security alliances benefit Americans. With the election nine months away, Trump remains in a dominant position, with opposition still struggling to crack the MAGA code.

Online discussions regarding Ukraine saw an uptick in volume earlier in early February due to the Ukraine spending bill in the Senate. The key themes dominating conversations about Ukraine primarily revolve around a $95 billion aid package designed to support Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. The discussions are focused on the advancement of this bill in the U.S. Senate and the political dynamics surrounding it. A few themes from online discussions are:

U.S. Foreign Aid Package

Many discussions are centered around the U.S. Senate's decision to move forward with this substantial aid package. Some users view this as a positive development, highlighting that 18 Republicans backed the legislation despite opposition from former President Trump. This topic increases positive sentiment towards Ukraine as it portrays the country as a beneficiary of bipartisan support in the U.S. Senate.

Political Divisions

The aid package has also stirred debates on political lines. Some Republicans, including Trump, are against the bill, while a significant number of Republicans and Democrats support it. This has led to discussions about intra-party divisions, particularly within the Republican Party. Depending on political leanings, this topic either increases or decreases sentiment towards Ukraine.

International Relations

There are robust discussions around the geopolitical implications of the aid package, especially in relation to Ukraine's position in global politics. Positive sentiments are associated with the perception that the aid package will reinforce Ukraine's diplomatic position and security.

Opposition to Aid

A notable portion of the discussion is from individuals expressing opposition to the aid package. Some argue that the funds could be better used domestically, while others express anti-war sentiments, suggesting the money will be used to fund conflict. This topic tends to decrease sentiment towards Ukraine, as it associates the country with controversial U.S. foreign aid policies.

Role of Trump: Former President Trump's opposition to the aid package is a recurring theme in the discussions. Some users support Trump's stance, while others criticize it. This topic tends to polarize sentiments towards Ukraine along partisan lines.

Talking About - Ukraine

Sentiment - Ukraine

Foreign, or Domestic?

Geopolitical Conflicts

A significant portion of the conversation revolves around expressing concern over Russia's perceived aggression. This includes discussions about the potential for World War III if Russia is encouraged to attack NATO allies, as well as the need to support Ukraine against such aggression.

International Relations

Another key theme is the role of the United States and other countries in assisting Ukraine. This includes debates about the proposed $95 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, with some voicing support for the aid and others criticizing it.

Domestic Politics

Discussions also touch on the impact of domestic US politics on Ukraine, with comments on senators voting against the aid package and former President Trump's stance towards Russia and Ukraine.

Impact to Support - Ukraine

Sentiment towards Ukraine varies across political affiliations. Republicans tend to express more skepticism towards aid packages and are more likely to support stronger action against Russia. Democrats, on the other hand, are generally more supportive of providing aid and diplomatic solutions to the conflict. Independents show a range of views, reflecting their diverse political beliefs.

Increased sentiment towards Ukraine, both positive and negative, can be triggered by key events such as geopolitical conflicts, proposed aid packages, and statements by political figures. For example, the rescue of Israeli hostages in Gaza sparked discussions about international relations and the role of different countries in resolving conflicts. In contrast, the proposed aid package for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan has fueled debates and possibly negative sentiment about foreign aid and its implications for domestic politics and international relations.

The Democratic Party’s divide between its establishment base and progressive branches is growing. Overall, there seems to be a split among Democrats and progressives, with some continuing to support Israel's right to defend itself and others advocating for a more balanced approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with an emphasis on human rights and international law. There is a strong sentiment of frustration towards the amount of military aid going to Israel, with some suggesting it should be reduced or cut off completely.

Some Democrats are supportive of the US's military aid to Israel, viewing it as necessary to combat threats from Hamas and other destabilizing forces in the Middle East. They believe that Iran, backed by Russia and China, is a significant threat to global peace, and that the US and its allies must remain vigilant. They also argue that Hamas has been a significant contributor to the ongoing conflict and suffering in Gaza, using aid money for military purposes instead of improving the lives of Palestinians.

On the other hand, there are Democrats and progressives who are critical of the US's military aid to Israel. They condemn the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and argue for a reassessment of the US's loyalty to Israel. They are concerned about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, accusing Israel of blocking aid and contributing to the suffering of the Palestinian people. Some go as far as calling for an end to US funding for Israel, equating Israel's actions in Gaza to genocide.

Talking About (Democrats)

Some of the more progressive Democrats express a sense of betrayal, calling it a "huge concession" that the bipartisan border-Israel-Ukraine package blocks all funding for UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) from the US. They object to the idea of providing more money for Israel while reducing aid to Palestinian children.

The discussions also reveal a concern among Democrats about the potential implications of not passing the bill. Some users note that failure to pass the bill could lead to direct military confrontations in the Middle East and against Russia, suggesting a fear of escalation.

Ukraine Approval Remains low as overwhelming majority of Americans Focus Instead on Border Security and Immigration Crisis

Recent analysis from the Media Intelligence Group (MIG) offers a comprehensive look into how both American engagement and support for Ukraine remains low, in serious contrast from high levels seen at the start of the Ukraine conflict. These insights reveal that despite ongoing debates in Congress about further aid for Ukraine, American opinion remains unchanged and instead focused on America First principals.

Shifting Focus: MIG's data indicates that online engagement surrounding Global Affairs is viewed increasingly with an America First lens.

• Engagement towards Ukraine is dwarfed by discussions about Border Security or more longstanding priorities like the US-Israeli alliance.
  • MIG found that over the last 30 days, Ukraine averages 1,106 online daily mentions, with a total of 33,185 mentions of Ukraine.
    
  • In contrast, discussions about Border Security and the Migrant Crisis averaged 8,836 daily online mentions, totaling 265,095 online mentions in the last 30 days.
    
  • Similarly, online conversations about Israel and Palestine are even more prominent, with a daily average of 9,072 online mentions and a total of 278,200 online mentions in the last 30 days.

Ukraine Hawks fail to sway Americans:

• Further analysis from the MIG reveals American approval of Ukraine remains consistently below 45%, contrasting sharply with the high levels of backing seen at the start of the conflict.
  
• In late 2023, Gallup found that American support for Ukraine had dropped sharply since the onset of Russia’s invasion.
  
• When Russia forces had first breached Ukrainian defenses, American support for Ukraine stood at 66%. This dropped sharply in Gallup’s subsequent poll in October 2023, when 41% of respondents stated they believed the United States was doing too much for Ukraine.
  
• MIG’s latest numbers from the last 30 days find support for Ukraine hasn’t budged. Despite many Ukraine Hawks in Congress making the case for further aid to Kiev, MIG finds Ukraine’s average approval stuck at 41%.
  
• Worse, Ukraine’s approval reached 44% just three times in the last 30 days, while it fell below 40% for 7 days total.

America First, Here to Stay:

• MIG's data underscores a growing shift in America’s focus in prioritizing an America First global perspective, as online discussions about Ukraine sink into further irrelevancy and are eclipsed by Border Security and Immigration debates.
  
• Notably, these findings are supported by a recent Harvard Harris poll, which found Immigration as the top policy concern amongst Americans, well ahead of foreign policy but even surpassing inflation and the economy.
  
• Despite unending frustrations with a Congress many believe is disconnected from the rest of America, recent comments from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell may reveal Americans are forcing D.C. to listen. This week, McConnell told Senate colleagues “When we started this, the border united us and Ukraine divided us” but that “The politics on this have changed.”

Recent MIG data shows that the discussion on the Israel-Hamas war appears to have a mix of both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine comments on platforms like X (formerly Twitter). However, the majority of hashtagged comments tend to lean more towards pro-Palestine sentiments.

On TikTok, pro-Palestine hashtags vastly outweigh pro-Israel hashtags in a way that is inconsistent with other social platforms across the internet. This discrepancy suggests that pro-Palestine content on TikTok may not be completely organic.

In addition, discussion about the Israel-Hamas conflict significantly increased on social media following the October 7 attack. Prior to the 7th, posts about Israel and Palestine on both X and TikTok were negligible and posts and views dramatically increased from October 7 on.

Posts Before and After October 7

Average daily posts on X 15 days before and after October 7

• Posts using the hashtag #israel reached a high of 251,331 on X on October 7.
• Posts using the hashtag #palestine reached a high of 136,498 on X on October 7.

• Posts using the hashtag #israel reached a high of 181,500 on TikTok on October 7.
• Posts using the hashtag #palestine reached a high of 403,872 on TikTok on October 14.

Pro-Palestine and Pro-Israel Hashtags

• Since October 6, 2023, interest levels in pro-Palestine hashtags (#palestine and #freepalestine) have skyrocketed.
• Based on total post counts and TikTok’s proprietary interest score, pro-Palestine posts reached a high of nearly 1 million between October 14-20, 2023.
• In contrast, pro-Israel hashtags on TikTok only reached a high of just over 113,000 between October 7-13, 2023.
• Pro-Palestine content on TikTok vastly outweighs pro-Israel content. Since October 6, there were a total of 10 times as many pro-Palestine hashtags on TikTok as pro-Israel hashtags.

• On X, pro-Israel and pro-Palestine hashtags are much closer in volume. Tracking the hashtags #israel, #standwithisrael, #palestine, and #freepalestine, MIG data shows divided discussions.
• At the end of October, pro-Palestine hashtags on X reached a high of approximately 250,000.
• Pro-Israel hashtags on X reached a high of approximately 83,000 at the beginning of November.
• Pro-Palestine content on X outweighs pro-Israel content, but only by less than double since the end of October.

What People Are Saying

Based on the content of the analyzed discussions online, it is apparent that the comments heavily favor Palestine.

Palestine

• There is a high usage of hashtags such as #FreePalestine, #Gaza_Genocide, and #IsraelisGenocidalState, which indicates strong criticism of Israel.
• Pro-Palestine comments often criticize Israel's actions and policies, accuse Israel of human rights violations, and express sympathy for the Palestinians.
• They also call for a halt to Israel's occupation and the recognition of Palestine's statehood.
• These comments also tend to criticize U.S. politicians and policies that support Israel, and call for solidarity movements for Palestine.

Israel

• Pro-Israel comments, on the other hand, often criticize Hamas and accuse them of terrorist activities.
• They argue that Israel has a right to defend itself against Hamas' attacks, and some even call for the complete elimination of Hamas.
• These comments also often express concern for Israeli hostages and criticize the UN and U.S. politicians for their perceived support of Hamas.

Potentially Biased Content

The implications of MIG data raise concerns about the potential skewing or bias of content, especially on TikTok.

• Some commentors online suggest TikTok might be purposefully promoting or suppressing certain narratives, possibly as a result of commercial pressures or political influences.
• For example, Elon Musk's reaction to advertisers allegedly trying to influence X content raises questions about the potential for corporate or government influence over the dissemination of information on all social platforms.
• However, it is challenging to definitively determine whether the content is purposefully skewed, based on public comments alone.
• While the discussions suggest possible bias or skewing, they also reflect users' individual perceptions, which may be influenced by various factors.

Further research would be required to definitively establish the extent and nature of any potential skewing of content on TikTok.

Homeschooling in Brazil

Discussion About Homeschooling

MIG data shows that online discussions about homeschooling in Brazil are not particularly prominent.

• Low discussion suggests that it may not be a popular topic of conversation in relation to other current events or that it does not generate as much controversy or attention as other issues.
• However, the lack of discussion on homeschooling does not necessarily reflect a lack of interest or importance of the issue in the broader Brazilian context.

The top discussion topics in Brazil over the last 30 days do not include anything specifically related to homeschooling or education regulations.

Public Discussion About Education

• There is some discussion about education secretaries working on reinforcement schooling in 2024 due to almost 80% of students not learning anything during the pandemic.
• There are some calls for the adoption of homeschooling in response to Brazil's poor performance in PISA, a global student assessment.
• The fact that Bolsonaro's government had four Ministers of Education, each seemingly worse than the last, is also a point of dissatisfaction.

Jair Bolsonaro

Sentiment seems predominantly negative for Bolsonaro.

Positive

• Some defend Bolsonaro, arguing that he kept the country financially stable during the pandemic.
• They say poor performance in education is due to a system deeply entrenched in Marxism.
• Some also suggest that the criticisms are unfair given that Bolsonaro only had four years in power compared to the 14 years of PT rule.

Negative

• Some express disgust towards Bolsonaro, with references to a friend of his allegedly making inappropriate comments about women.
• Accusations of Bolsonaro inciting a coup, accusations that he’s a thief and corrupt with some demanding his arrest.
• Many criticisms focus on Bolsonaro's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, with accusations of negligence and delay in vaccine procurement, contributing to a high death toll.
• Dissatisfaction with Bolsonaro, accusing him of having allowed inflation to grow more than da Silva.

Lula da Silva

Public opinion toward da Silva seems mixed.

Positive

• Some commenters applaud actions taken under Lula da Silva's administration, specifically in relation to actions against organized crime.
• They reference the confiscation of over 3 billion reals from organized crime, and laud the efforts of President Lula and his government.
• Praise for his recent negotiations with Germany, which resulted in significant investment in a high-tech lab to combat pandemics.
• The government's Desenrola Brasil program, which aims to help citizens resolve their debts, is praised by some users who view it as a positive initiative from the Silva government.

Negative

• Criticism for indirectly contributing to Bolsonaro's rise to power and accuse him of involvement in various frauds.
• Some call da Silva a thief and a criminal.
• Criticism for his comments comparing Israel's defense actions to genocide, with calls for balance from authorities.
• Some accuse him of supporting terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, while others defend him, stating that he would never support such groups.

From the online discussions about the Argentine presidential election between Javier Milei and Sergio Massa, latest MIG data reflected

• Significant increase in Ideologies, Int’l Affairs, and Security Issues
• No major decreases across other topics
• Ideologies may have been seen as the deciding factor in the late stages over Fiscal Policy

Ideologies

Agent of Change, Concern

• Supporters excited for anti-woke, anti-left 
• Seen as beacon of freedom 
• Traditional rallying cry used online “Vive La Libetard” (long live freedom) 
• Some voters worry for return to neoliberal policies 
• Some voters also dissaprove of confrontational style 

Of note, a sharp increase in sentiment (and volume) was only reflected concerning Milei on the day of the election.

Fiscal Policy

Less Discussed, But Less Disliked

• Going back to October 31st, the average sentiment scores for Fiscal Policy were
  • Massa: 38
  • Milei: 42

Many commenters express criticism towards the previous leadership of Sergio Massa and Alberto Fernández, blaming them for high inflation, poverty, unemployment, security issues, and a significant deficit. Milei is seen as promising to lower inflation and fix the fiscal deficit. However, some commenters express concern about Milei's plans to privatize public companies like YPF, Télam, the Public TV, and National Radio.

General Election Analysis

Data appears to reflect a general tone, which is most voters sought a change in the status quo (economics, corruption).

MIG data indicating a Melei lead was accurate to the final vote tally

• MIG reporting
  • Melei 53%
  • Massa 47%
• Final vote
  • Melei 56%
  • Massa 44%

The overall view of Milei is mixed. Some comments express hope and congratulation, recognizing his victory and looking forward to the future under his leadership. There are also comments that seem to suggest his win was due to demagoguery and gained votes from traditional right-wing supporters and a high proportion of Schiaretti's supporters. Some express caution, stating that they hope Argentinians understand that the process under his leadership will be long.

Conclusion

• For the final ten days, there was a near statistical tie in Talking About and Head-to-Head, prior to a clear break at the end
  • Talking About
    • Massa: 3351/day
    • Melei: 3328/day
  • Head-to-Head
    • Massa: 50%
    • Melei: 50%
• The online discussions show a clear dissatisfaction toward Massa, many of the comments seeking change from the status quo pertaining to the economic conditions (inflation, poverty and unemployment rates), and for increasing the fiscal deficit.
• They also accuse him of corruption and deception. Some comments suggest that if Massa wins, the situation will worsen.
• Some users express support for Milei, blaming current economic problems on populist governments and expressing hope that Milei could bring about change.
  • e.g. proposed policies could reduce poverty and improve security
• Others express concerns about Milei's plans, suggesting that they might lead to unemployment and other economic issues.
• Melei is also accused of being associated with fascism, with some commenters express concerns about him allowing fascists to run rampant.
  • e.g. Some Melei supporters want to suppress freedom of expression.

Overall, the majority of comments seem to indicate a preference for Milei over Massa, driven primarily by dissatisfaction with the current economic situation they attribute to Massa's leadership.

Massa is criticized for his perceived hypocrisy such as his expensive Dolce & Gabbana jeans, which they view as contradictory to his image as a candidate who cares for the poor. They also criticize his supporters for protesting against insecurity, which they believe would only be a problem if Milei wins.

Milei on the other hand, is accused of being associated with fascism. Some commenters express concerns about him allowing fascists to run rampant. He is also criticized for having supporters who want to suppress freedom of expression.

Sergio Massa is viewed by some as using the state for his own benefit and the benefit of his friends. He is accused of not genuinely believing in social justice and using it as an argument to maintain his power. However, others express support for Massa, appreciating that he is not associated with certain ideologies or politics they disapprove of. There are also mentions of Massa receiving death threats and expressions of support in the face of such threats.

Javier Milei is seen by some as a champion of liberalism, with claims that he has done more for the people than any other politician by showing them a possible reality and encouraging hope. However, he also has critics who accuse him of not believing in democracy, the state, the nation, and social justice, and only believing in market freedom. Some criticize his proposals as a recipe for social and economic chaos. Others argue that Milei is not liberal but a right-wing conservative neoliberal, and fear a return to the neoliberal models of past presidents if he wins. However, Milei also has supporters who see him as the only candidate with plans to recover sovereignty and respect diverse lifestyles, and who believe that the future of Argentina is liberal.

Public Comments

• 🦁‼️ Los gorilas del mundo rendidos a los pies de Milei: los festejos de Bukele, Bolsonaro y Zelenski 👉 Vox, Elon Musk y Donald Trump también se sumaron a la victoria de La Libertad Avanza. (💣 Faltó Darth Vader)
• La logica indica que Milei va a ser Zelensky y va a terminar mal, o va a ser Boris Johnson y se va a diluir en su extremismo. En ambos casos lo van a repudiar los mismos que lo votaron.
• En este país no se habla de esto. No hablan los medios, no lo repiten 24hs como otras cosas. No lo ves en @c5n ni en @todonoticias día y noche. De esto no habla Massa, no habla Milei, ni Macri, Ni Larreta, Ni Alberto... La ciudad de Buenos Aires es sionista GAZA 💔
• me van a fallar los de milei si ahora en el bunker no cantan "anda a ver a una bruja, anda a ver a un doctor que te saque del orto la pija del leon"
• Pasen la data!.. igual es tristísimo ver a alguien tan preparado, que termine en una secta de delincuentes!😩😎 " SI GANA MILEI Quemó TODOS MIS LIBROS, TITULO DE HARDVARD Y MI TESIS DOCTORAL DE MAS DE 600 PAGINAS.." " YO CREO QUE NO VA OCURRIR..." (Atilio Boron) así dijo está eminencia, Politólogo y Sociólogo Ultrakirchnerista QUEREMOS SABER CUADO Y EN QUE LUGAR VA PRENDER LA HOGUERA
• Gracias Rusa linda Ganó Milei, sumando casi la totalidad de votos de la derecha tradicional de JxC y una muy alta proporción de Schiaretti. Con demagogia, ganaron parte del voto popular, contra un gobierno donde los ricos se enriquecieron y perdieron los que trabajan, producto del pacto con el FMI.
• JAJAJAJA Si gana Milei, solo ruego que los argentinos entiendan que el proceso es largo.
• Vos no laburas y vivis del Estado, el FMI presta plata al 4 por ciento, quien la pidio es el peronismo, al que vos no nombras obviamente porque sos el vagon de cola eterno, la putita del fascismo, hija de puta Ganó Milei, sumando casi la totalidad de votos de la derecha tradicional de JxC y una muy alta proporción de Schiaretti. Con demagogia, ganaron parte del voto popular, contra un gobierno donde los ricos se enriquecieron y perdieron los que trabajan, producto del pacto con el FMI.
• @SergioChouza @JMilei Tu pollo pide licencia y huye, pero seguiremos pagando su plan Platita que son 3 puntos del PBI y deja un déficit 2024 de -8% del PBI; similar al del 2020 cuando su gobierno que se va no nos dejaba trabajar y producir, REBIÉN NOS IBA PAYASO 🤡