As Trump’s New York trial over alleged hush money payments gets underway, there’s significant partisan reactions on both sides. Republicans tend to be angry and frustrated about the trial, characterizing it as politically motivated and unjust. Democrats are more likely to celebrate the potential for punishment and criticize Trump’s behavior during the trail.

It remains to be seen whether the trial or possible convictions will impact Trump’s support in the presidential election. However, sentiment among all voters is lower regarding accusations made against Trump than the court case itself.

• The top three keywords used in discussions related to Trump and allegations, according to MIG Reports data, are “Corruption,” “Accusations,” and “Biden.”
• The top keywords related to Trump and legal topics are “Indictment,” “Investigation,” and “DOJ.”
• Nationally, sentiment toward Trump’s legal cases hovers in the low to mid 40% range, while sentiment toward allegations against him stays mid to high 30%.
• In swing states, sentiment for both topics is tighter, but averages higher for both legal and allegations.

Trump’s Gag Order

Many voters view the gag order against Trump as an unjust political move instigated by the Biden administration. Often Trump supporters, they express their frustration with politicized courts and judges who seem to be out to “get Trump.”

Furthermore, there are those who voice their concern over the potential impact of the gag order on democracy. They view the gag order as a threat to democratic principles, arguing that it hampers the ability of voters to make informed decisions as the election unfolds. This sentiment is more frequently held by Republicans and MAGA conservatives. But the concern does seem to cross party lines in some instances where voters are concerned about the integrity of the court system and elections.

Never Trumpers and Democrats tend to support the gag order, celebrating the idea that Trump should be silenced by a judge’s order.

Republicans Reactions to Jury Selection and Judge Merchan

Many Republicans view this hush money trial as politically motivated and part of a broader attempt to undermine the election. They argue Judge Merchan’s actions and the evidence allowed in the case are fueled by partisan bias and are unfair. Some suggest prosecutorial focus should be shifted to other political figures, such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, whom they accuse of committing crimes and violations.

Conservatives are also more likely to discuss the possibility of a biased jury. They point out that jury selection typically take longer – even in cases where the dependent isn’t a former president. This group worries that it will be nearly impossible for Trump to have an unbiased jury in a city like New York.

Democrats Are Eager for a Conviction

Democrats are largely enthralled and thrilled to witness the Trump trial. They say it is a necessary step towards holding him accountable for his alleged actions. They argue no one, including the President, should be above the law. This group often reiterates their belief that Trump undermines democracy and is a would-be dictator.

Most liberals and Democrats view the trial as a long-overdue measure of accountability. As inferred from Joy Reid's comments, some may see the prosecution of Trump as a victory for multicultural and multiracial democracy.

Democrats are also vocal about how they view Trump’s actions leading up to and during the trial. They criticize his demeanor in the court room and generally view the press's reporting on the trial as accurate and fair. Some Democrats have even called for Trump's immediate imprisonment.

Independents Say They’ll Judge the Trial on its Merits

Independent and more moderate voters have typically scattered views. Some express concern about the potential implications of a conviction if Trump should lose. Others question the timing and motivations behind the prosecutions.

Many Independents say they value weighing the facts of the case without the lens of party loyalty. They may be more focused on the legalities and the implications of the case for political norms and the rule of law. This could cause moderates to sway in Trump’s favor if they perceive a flimsy legal cause may be politicizing the court system.

Other believe Trump should face the consequences of his actions, siding with Democrats. However, in general, Independents are more likely to focus on the specific facts of the case rather than each party's rhetoric about the proceedings.

Media Coverage of the Trial

The press's coverage of the trial is similarly partisan. Conservative outlets tend to portray the trial as a politically motivated attack on Trump. They tend to focus on Judge Merchan’s actions and whether they believe the jurors can remain fair.

Liberal and mainstream outlets largely focus on describing Trump’s actions and demeanor in court. Some outlets have included analysis of Trump’s expressions and interactions in detail.

Many voters view various news coverage of the trial as biased according to political leaning. They also lament the fact that no video or audio from the trial is allowed, saying voters have a right to witness and judge for themselves.

The man who set himself on fire outside the trial has added another layer to the discussion. His extreme act has been reported widely, with his identity as an "investigative researcher" adding to confusion about his potential political affiliations.

Recent accusations of biased reporting against National Public Radio (NPR) have stirred up public resentment and calls for defunding. After veteran journalist Uri Berliner published an article with The Free Press chastising NPR for its unsupportable liberal bias, his subsequent suspension and resignation created controversy online.

My resignation letter to NPR CEO @krmaher pic.twitter.com/0hafVbcZAK

— Uri Berliner (@uberliner) April 17, 2024

Many discussions center around the belief that NPR, along with other mainstream media outlets, display a significant left-wing bias. People, including Berliner, argue NPR prioritizes a leftist agenda over objective journalism, contributing to polarization and distrust. This bias is perceived in the choice of stories covered, the framing of news narratives, and the selection of sources or experts for interviews.

Liberals tend to be more supportive, but some still have criticisms. They suggest NPR's bias is not so much a partisan issue but rather a reflection of the organization's commitment to "well-meaning liberal feel-good" coverage. They argue NPR is sometimes "wimpy" in its reporting and works hard not to offend anyone.

Disconcerting Comments from NPR’s CEO

There are heated debates around NPR's leadership, particularly the new CEO Katherine Maher. Critics argue her views undermine the objective pursuit of truth and threaten freedom of speech.

Berliner himself said in his resignation statement that her leadership “confirm the very problems” of leftist bias. Others like author Chris Rufo have exposed past comments from Maher, betraying her as an apparent leftist devotee. These discussions among journalists online have also generated public awareness and backlash.

EXCLUSIVE: Katherine Maher doesn't just want to "stamp out bad information" on the internet. She wants to replace it with "good information"—i.e., left-wing narratives—and force the public to "sit within that good information" as "a collective."

Big Sister has arrived. pic.twitter.com/7kfq8VYHfj

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) April 18, 2024

Maher’s defenders praise her leadership skills and commitment to transparency, brushing aside accusations of clear partisan loyalty. Many critics cite her past work with Wikipedia, tweets and posts stumping for Joe Biden, and clear cut liberal perspectives on identity politics, censorship, and the First Amendment.

Taxpayer Dollars Supporting Left-Wing Media

NPR's public funding is a contentious issue. Critics argue taxpayer money should not be used to fund a platform that is being exposed as biased and propagandist. They argue for defunding NPR, asserting it should be privately funded like other media outlets.

Criticisms of taxation and government spending amid other pressing issues like a struggling economy and benefits for illegal aliens seems to exacerbate negativity toward public funding for NPR. While Americans struggle to make ends meet, many seem appalled and indignant about tax dollars being spent to support outlets like NPR.

Overarching Distrust of American Media

The issue of bias in NPR's reporting is not isolated but is part of a broader conversation about media bias in the United States. Americans are increasingly polarized in their perceptions of media bias, with many believing most news outlets have a political bias. This has rapidly eroded trust in mainstream media and spurred an increasing reliance on alternative news sources.

Online discussions also suggest Americans believe mainstream media actively supports the current administration and various Democrat political figures. Many of these discussions accuse the media and Democrats of lying and coordinating to push messaging for Democrat politicians.

Many accuse NPR and other outlets of being a propaganda arm for the Democratic Party, saying their views are dismissed and unrepresented. Some also direct personal attacks at various media figures like Katherine Maher, Rachel Maddow, and Don Lemon.

There is also discussion about a 2014 Pew Research Center study which found that NPR's audience skews liberal, with 67% identifying as left-leaning while only 21% identifying as right-leaning. Many commentors say even these percentages fail to capture the true composition of NPR’s left leaning audience.

Overall, many Americans view the resignation of Uri Berliner as indicative of a larger trend of liberal bias in media organizations.

Current conversations around the possibility of Trump's re-election among Democratic, left-leaning, and progressive voices reveal much concern, skepticism, and outright opposition. Rachel Maddow and other left-leaning commentators often criticize Trump's policies and leadership style, frequently discussing the potential implications and risks of a second Trump term. At the same time, they dismiss or redirect from problems with the Biden administration.

Much of the commentary class is focused on nebulous topics which are difficult to quantify or provide nuanced discourse on. Common discussions among leftists and progressives regarding a second Trump term typically center around perceived authoritarianism, isolationism, and abuses of power. There is a strong sentiment among progressives that a second Trump term would lead to the destruction of democratic norms and increased polarization.

Authoritarianism

Progressives fear authoritarianism if Trump is reelected. They fear a combative press relationship, disregard for checks and balances, and unilateral decision-making, warning a second term would escalate into a more authoritarian leadership style.

Isolationism

Progressives worry about Trump's isolationist foreign policy, claiming it strains alliances, undermines global cooperation on climate change, and empowers authoritarian regimes. They fear a second term would prolong or worsen these trends.

Abuses of Power

This group asserts Trump abused power in his first term, highlighting actions like firing FBI Director James Comey and attempting to manipulate the Justice Department against political foes.

FISA Concerns

There is fear Trump might misuse FISA to target domestic political opponents, risking civil liberties.

These concerns are sometimes shared among moderate Democrats and Independents, although the intensity of the concerns vary. There is a significant portion of moderate Democrats and Independents who appear to be more focused on other issues, or who might view these concerns as overly alarmist. Additionally, moderate Democrats and Independents might disagree with progressives on policy issues, even if they share some of the same concerns about a potential second Trump term.

MIG Reports analysis identifies that online discussions about Biden outweigh those of Trump. Despite this, Trump’s approval ratings are generally higher across issues important to voters. This showcases that establishment media’s messaging is not representative of the electorate or even the entire Democratic party.

Online commentary among left leaning voters also reveals dissatisfaction with the current political climate writ large. While many do criticize the conservative right, there is also dissatisfaction with what they see as the failures of both liberal and centrist Democrats. Some argue for a more radical, leftist approach to politics. Others express frustration at what they perceive as a lack of focus on key issues like economic inequality, healthcare, and the environment.

The Biden administration’s performance is another major focus of Democratic voter commentary. Some criticize Biden for his handling of the border crisis. Others accuse his administration of denying women the right to buy houses by allowing a significant increase in housing prices.

There is criticism directed towards Vice President Kamala Harris, with some suggesting she was chosen for her identity rather than her abilities or success.

Many left leaning and progressive voters are unhappy with the current tax system, expressing concerns about misuse of tax dollars. These voters are frustrated with how their tax money is being used, especially in terms of foreign aid and government spending. They suggest tax dollars are being squandered or misallocated, and express resentment over the perceived lack of benefits they are receiving in return for their taxes.

After a recent video of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee showed her speaking at a high school during Monday’s solar eclipse. Jackson Lee is seen calling the moon a planet and saying it is “made up of gases.” She continued to say, "The sun is a mighty powerful heat, but it’s almost impossible to go near the sun. The moon is more manageable."

Comments from Americans online about Rep. Jackson Lee's statements are overwhelmingly negative. While Jackson Lee herself claims Republicans are criticizing her for something that is unimportant, voters seem to associate Jackson Lee’s misinformed comments as typical of politicians who regularly make false statements.

People online are mocking her for making such a glaring error. Some even called her a “moron” and others questioned the quality of her education. Many express disbelief that she has been re-elected multiple times despite her perceived lack of knowledge. The conversation strongly indicates a significant amount of voter dissatisfaction with Jackson Lee.

Voters also repeatedly bring up the fact that she used to sit on the House Science Committee and the House Space Committee, expressing incredulity that someone in her position could make such erroneous statements. They criticize her as being uneducated, incompetent, and even question her intelligence and that of anyone who voted for her.

Several comments also sarcastically suggest she should be the first person to try to live on the moon, given her belief in its gas composition. Some also express embarrassment and concern over her representation of Texas's 18th district.

Another emerging theme in the conversation connects Jackson Lee to Joe Biden, also mocking him for his own frequent fumbles, inaccuracies, and obvious cognitive decline.

The newsworthy event gave people a reason to criticize her for her policies as well. Some called her out for giving a poorly prepared eclipse speech rather than addressing more pressing issues like crime, border control, and high taxes.

People also seem frustrated about her being a part of the Congress that levies taxes. Overall, the sentiment appears to be negative, with voters voicing disapproval and mockery.

• Rep. Jackson Lee’s approval dropped as mentions spiked after the video was released.
• Her approval dropped from 47% on Sunday to 40% on Tuesday, along with an increase of online mentions from 14 to 278,

Voter Opinions of People in Congress

This incident with Sheila Jackson Lee echoes a broader theme in conversations about elected officials. There is a prevalent belief among American voters that most Congress members are self-serving, unaccountable, and lack the necessary qualifications to effectively carry out their duties.

Overall sentiment seems to be one of distrust and dissatisfaction. Many voters display a cynical view of the "ruling class" and their qualifications for office. People often feel their representatives are more interested in ideological posturing than in serving the people.

Several people express frustration with the perceived hypocrisy of politicians, suggesting they are out of touch with everyday Americans. Others take issue with politicians' intelligence, implying they are not informed or articulate enough to effectively govern.

There's a notable level of anger directed at both Democrats and Republicans, accusing both sides of being pompous and corrupt, as part of the political elite.

Another common sentiment is a perceived lack of accountability among members of Congress. Several voters say these officials have managed to evade consequences for their actions, further fueling the belief that they are above the law. This lack of trust in the integrity of Congress could contribute to voter apathy and disillusionment.

It seems most voters are deeply dissatisfied with the current state of American politics. This suggests a potential appetite for new voices and ideas in the political sphere.

Former ESPN anchor Sage Steele recently alleged on Fox News that her 2021 interview with President Biden was completely scripted. Steele claims the interview questions were prepared in advance and required strict adherence by the president’s communications team. Her comments about the interview, which originally aired on ESPN, are generating controversy in the field of journalism, opening discussions about the authenticity of the interview and journalistic integrity.

It also fans the flames of concern many Americans have about Joe Biden’s mental fitness for office. Many voters believe Biden’s cognitive acuity is rapidly declining, necessitating tight control over what the President says and what questions press are allowed to ask him.

In traditional journalism, it is considered unethical to provide interviewees with scripted questions beforehand. This is because it allows guests to prepare answers, which can potentially manipulate the narrative and mislead the public. The objective of journalism is to uncover truth and hold those in power accountable, which may be compromised when interviewees are given prepared questions.

In the case of President Biden, it also highlights concerns over his ability to answer questions extemporaneously, without confusion or large lapses in memory. Instances of Biden seeming disoriented during public appearances are a growing concern for many voters on both sides of the aisle.

The situation with Sage Steele and Joe Biden represents a recurring issue for Biden as more accusations emerge of scripted interviews with the press. In this instance, people speculate whether ESPN, as a major news outlet, allowed its journalistic standards to be undermined for a high-profile political figure. This has potential implications for the credibility of ESPN and any journalist who allows prepared questions for the president.

The controversy also raises questions about the role of media in politics. Many people believe if media outlets are accepting scripted questions from the Biden administration, it will lead to unfair bias, favoring the White House agenda over journalistic inquiry. This can lead to a lack of trust in the media and further polarize political discourse.

MIG Reports analysis of the original interview identified:

• The questions were tailored to convey specific messages.
• Themes included COVID-19 vaccination, sports-politics intersection, and family anecdotes.
• There was an emphasis on promoting vaccination and addressing election issues in Georgia.
• Concerns were raised about potential propaganda or manipulation.
• There were obvious elements of political messaging present in the interview.

The scripted nature of presidential interviews implies a corrupt relationship between politics and media in the modern era. While political leaders seek to control their messaging and shape public opinion, media organizations have a duty to prioritize journalistic integrity and independence.

This event highlights the importance of journalistic integrity and the potential implications of compromising unbiased reporting. It suggests a dereliction of duty by media outlets in holding the powerful accountable and providing the public with unbiased information.

The narrative around gun violence in mainstream media reports is heavily centered on mass shootings and the politicization of the Second Amendment. The discourse often revolves around debates about gun control, mental health reform, and the responsibility of lawmakers in implementing policies to curb gun violence.

However, there is a glaring lack of attention to the rampant gun violence that plagues inner cities. Meanwhile, there is an abundance of reporting on mass shooting incidents like the one in downtown Indianapolis, which left seven juveniles injured.

Americans largely perceive that media reporting is skewed towards sensationalized mass shootings, often ignoring the daily violence that affects marginalized communities in urban areas while also advocating for illegal immigrants to own guns.

Mainstream narratives rarely include the thousands of gun-related deaths and injuries that occur in, largely blue, urban areas. Stories about daily shootings in places like Chicago, Detroit, and Baltimore rarely make national headlines. This contributes to a perception that these incidents are normal or expected, thereby reducing the urgency to address them.

Online discourse often devolves into partisan debates about gun rights and controls. For instance, some voters accuse Chuck Schumer of using a fallen NYPD officer's death to push for gun control. Many claim Schumer and other Democrats politicize the issue. The Second Amendment is frequently invoked in these discussions, with some arguing gun control measures infringe upon constitutional rights.

The mainstream media's failure to highlight inner-city gun violence seems to perpetuate a skewed understanding of the issue. It often favors sensationalized incidents over the chronic violence affecting specific communities. This can lead to policies that do not adequately address the root causes of most gun violence, such as socio-economic disparities and inadequate policing.

Many Americans believe the mainstream media plays a critical role in shaping public opinion and policymaking regarding gun violence. It crucial for voters to have access to comprehensive and balanced new coverage – especially on issues like guns in America. Honest, unbiased reporting on urban gun violence would not only help raise awareness about the extent of the problem, but also promote more effective strategies to combat it. However, many people feel the media often draws false conclusions from a politicized point of view.

Online discussion among American voters and independent journalists often seems to directly dispute media narratives about gun violence. Some point out that most mass shootings are gang-related and occur in African American neighborhoods. This contrasts with the mainstream media's typical portrayal of mass shootings as random acts of violence committed by white, “lone wolf” perpetrators with extremist manifestos.

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

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

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

Predictive Analysis Vs Mainstream Narrative

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Percent Attending Church Weekly

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

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

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

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

Demographics and Mass Attendance

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

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

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

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

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

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

Recent events in media expose the growing dissatisfaction Americans have with news and entertainment outlets. Data suggests that viewer trust in mainstream media outlets is precipitously low as viewers feel media elites despise average people.

There is also a perception among many that the mainstream media is biased in its coverage. People point out examples when news highlights any Biden surge in the polls, rather than scrutinizing his policies. There is a sentiment that Trump's actions and policies are often unfairly criticized or misrepresented by the media.

Media Bias Against Trump

There is a strong sentiment among right leaning and conservative Americans that media coverage of Trump is unfairly negative and strongly biased against him. They accuse outlets and commentators of spreading lies and being part of a "witch hunt" against the former president. This sentiment is particularly strong among older demographics and those living in traditionally conservative states.

This group sees Trump as a champion for their beliefs and values. They are harshly critical of what they perceive as liberal bias in the media. Many also express a belief in Trump's innocence in the face of ongoing legal issues and investigations, often attributing these to political persecution.

On the other hand, critics of Trump, who tend to identify as liberals or Democrats, are supportive of recent media coverage, particularly regarding his ongoing legal issues. They accuse Trump of corruption and believe his actions deserve scrutiny.

This sentiment is prevalent among younger demographics and those in traditionally liberal states. Critics also express frustration with what they perceive as the media's "soft" approach on Trump, arguing that he should be held more accountable for his actions.

Elite’s Disrespect for Average People

A recent example of Stephen Colbert's fundraising efforts for Joe Biden fuels voter perceptions that entertainment and media figures ignore the transgressions of Democrats while constantly harping on conservatives. Many criticize Colbert for using his cultural influence to sway political outcomes.

The interview between former CNN host Don Lemon and the owner of X, Elon Musk, has also spurred a significant response from the American public. The interview sparked conversations about media bias, with conservatives accusing networks like NBC of suppressing conservative voices and liberals accusing networks like Fox News of promoting misinformation. This indicates a deep distrust between the two sides and the media.

People are also discussing a recent controversy involving comedian Jon Stewart’s hypocrisy in discussing Trump’s New York legal case. Stewart reportedly overvalued his home in a similar way to what Trump is accused of doing. Many accuse Stewart of promoting a double standard and negatively shaping media perceptions. Some argue Stewart should be held to the same standards as Trump and pay back taxes.

There is also criticism directed at NBC for hiring and promptly firing former RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel. Discussions criticize the network for acquiescing to the complaints and laments voiced by NBC and MSNBC hosts like Chuck Todd, Kristen Welker, and Jen Psaki.

Normal Americans Feel Misrepresented

Another grievance many Americans express against mainstream media and entertainment is their elitism. There is a growing sense among working and middle-class voters, particularly conservatives, that media elites are out of touch with "normal" people.

This sentiment is fueled by perceived liberal bias in the media, with critics arguing media elites look down on traditional values and the everyday concerns of Americans living outside major urban centers. However, some still argue the media plays a crucial role in holding those in power accountable.

Despite some defense of mainstream media, the theme of "media elites" versus "normal Americans" is recurring in online discussions. Average people in middle America or suburban and rural communities feel marginalized and believe the media doesn't represent their perspectives or concerns.

While some simply feel media elites are distant from the realities of ordinary life, others perceive a targeted animosity from media figures. Many feel comments from figures like Joy Reid, Don Lemon, Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, and others reveal a certain disgust for average people.

There is also a prevailing sentiment that media elites “hate normal Americans” who align with conservative values. Some give examples of media figures insulting the intelligence of conservatives, deriding their traditions or religious beliefs, portraying negative stereotypes of them, and attributing false motives to their actions.

Dismissing the Sins of Their Allies

Many criticize the media for what they see as a bias towards the left and a tendency to downplay or ignore the transgressions of Democratic politicians. Middle-class voters often express feelings of being overlooked or undervalued, while victimizing and harmful actions by elites are justified and dismissed.

Mainstream media is perceived as propagandizing policies favoring the wealthy and powerful. This sentiment is reflected in discussions about the lack of representation for blue-collar Americans in the media and politics.

There are some who laud the media's efforts to hold the government accountable, however. This group praises the resilience of figures like Joe Biden in the face of intense scrutiny.

Former president Trump’s appearance at Officer Jonathan Diller’s wake, an NYC police officer killed in the line of duty, telegraphed support for normal Americans. At the same time, Biden’s New York fundraiser packed with media and political elites communicated the sense of disdain many middle-class Americans feel from the ruling class.

While Trump's attendance at the wake was generally seen as a positive gesture, the same cannot be said for Biden's fundraiser. Many American voters argue Biden should be more focused on running the country, rather than raising money for his campaign.

Overall public sentiment leans more positively towards Trump's attendance at Jonathan Diller’s wake than towards Biden's fundraiser. However, these sentiments are somewhat influenced by existing political biases among partisans.

Most Americans see Trump's actions as personal and direct, appealing to individuals on an emotional level. But they view Biden's exclusive fundraiser as prioritizing the wealthy and influential.

• Swing state voter sentiment toward Trump spiked to 57% regarding police and crime with the announcement of his appearance at Jonathan Diller’s wake.
• Biden’s sentiment in swing states on the topic of fundraising dipped slightly to 48% on the day of the event.

Comparing Average American Views of Trump vs Biden

The political and wealthy classes seem to generally divide along political lines in their views of Trump’s recent actions compared to Biden’s. However, for working-class citizens and middle America, the lines do not seem as partisan.

Most average Americans view Biden as ensconced in the ruling class and he could possibly be losing cachet even among blue-collar Democrats. MIG Reports analysis of online conversations reveals a contrast in how everyday Americans view Trump compared to Biden.

How Americans Responded to Trump

Many voters express admiration for Trump's public appearance in support of law enforcement and Jonathan Diller’s family. They perceive this as a gesture of his commitment to “Back the Blue” and mingle with the people. This resonates both with his voter base and working-class voters of all political affiliations.

Trump's attendance at the wake is seen by most people as a gesture of respect and solidarity with police officers. Many highlighted the absence of similar gestures from the Biden administration, inferring Trump's actions will further endear him to normal Americans.

His generous donation to pay off the mortgage of NYPD Officer Diller's widow has also been lauded as an act of kindness and compassion. This emphasizes the contrast of Biden fundraising for himself from the wealthy on the same night.

However, critics have expressed skepticism, arguing that Trump's actions are politically motivated and aimed at gaining public sympathy. Some skeptics suggest the appearance was a cynical distraction from his ongoing legal battles.

There are also related discussions about how leftist critics and the media discuss Trump and his recent good week. Many voters express a view that Trump will always receive criticism from entertainment and news, even with a positive gesture like supporting a slain police office.

Middle-Class Criticism of Biden

Biden's fundraising event has generated severe negativity among many American voters, much like his recent border visit contrasted with Trump's. This majority accuses him of prioritizing fundraising and power over addressing national issues.

Many express concerns about the use of taxpayer money, suggesting Biden should be focusing on more pressing issues like border security and the economy. A lot of people question the timing of the fundraiser, suggesting it distracts from Biden’s image issues as the mainstream media praises a “glitzy” and “star-studded” event.

The fawning media coverage has also caused many middle-class and blue-collar voters to criticize perceived elitism at a dinner design to flaunt wealth and power. This group argues Biden is alienating average Americans in favor of costal elites.

Staunch supporters and leftists, however, praised Biden's commitment to raising funds for his party. They view preventing Trump from a 2024 win as imperative and advocate for Biden’s social justice and woke agenda.

This group views the fundraiser as a critical step towards maintaining a Democratic majority in Congress. They commend his commitment to addressing issues like climate change, healthcare, and economic recovery.