As more American voters begin to think about the presidential election this fall, they are beginning to express concerns about political turmoil. MIG Reports analysis shows online discussion about increased turmoil in the form of violent, economic, and political contentions. While Democrats and Republicans typically emphasize different dangers, both sides seem to fear election interference and political violence.

The extent and nature of any pre-election turmoil could significantly impact voter sentiment and turnout, potentially affecting the election's outcome.

Mutual Worries Among Liberals and Conservatives

Most voters are concerned about corruption and unethical behavior within the government. They believe politicians are not acting in the best interest of the public and are instead focused on power and political agendas.

Election Interference

One of the most prominent concerns among all voters, regardless of party, is the possibility of election interference. For Democratic voters, fears seem to center more around potential foreign interference. Republican voters more frequently express skepticism about domestic interference from the Democrat party.

Political Violence and Riots

Memories of January 6 still loom large in the minds of many Democrats. This causes anxiety about the potential for increased “far-right violence,” whether Trump or Biden is reelected. Republicans worry more about politicized violence from leftist activists like Black Lives Matter or anti-Israel protesters. Both sides seem to fear political riots are highly likely no matter who wins the election.

October Surprises

The tradition of October surprises—major news stories breaking shortly before the election—also contributes to worries about election turmoil. Voters fear that such events could sway the election outcome, though there are many speculations as to what an October Suprise might be.

• National sentiment toward the economy, COVID, election integrity and protests have been decreasing in the last two weeks.
• Republicans voice concerns about a potential resurgence of COVID lockdowns and Democrats often worry about election interference.

Black Swan Events Could Bring Upheaval

Black swan events are unpredictable events which have potentially severe consequences. Given their nature, it's challenging to forecast what these could be – but many voters think of recent black swan events like COVID-19.

Some of the black swan events voter mention include:

• Significant escalation in international conflicts
• A global economic crisis
• Environmental or natural disasters
• Another public health or pandemic event

Any major black swan event could dramatically reshape the political landscape and voter sentiment.

Conservatives and right leaning voters are more likely to suggest black swan events like another public health crisis, causing renewed government lockdowns. They are also more likely to mention global economic situations which could severely impact American commerce and quality of life.

Liberal and left leaning voters are more likely to mention wars and conflicts breaking out internationally. They may also be more concerned about potential natural disasters or climate chaos due to climate change.

Republican Fears About Election Turmoil

Republican voters often speak out about potential changes to election laws which they believe could lead to fraud. They cite things like expanded mail-in voting or removal of voter ID laws as election dangers.

These voters also worry about violent protests or riots related to racial or social justice issues. There are also growing concerns about violent anti-Israel protests which could destabilize communities and potentially sway voter sentiment.

While Democrats talk more about misinformation online, some right leaning voters also worry about social media censorship or bias against conservative viewpoints. Many of this group believe that important information was suppressed during the 2020 election which, if voters had known, may have shifted opinions.

Overall, many voters express a lack of trust in the electoral process and legal system. Many Republicans feel the system is corrupt and untrustworthy, expressing disillusionment with the voting process in general. There is a growing sense that voting is becoming futile because of bureaucratic and power-grabbing tactics by corrupt politicians and institutions.

Democratic Fears in 2024

Democrats often voice concern about voter suppression, particularly impacting minority communities. They tend to place this as an important issue which could impede a fair election.

Liberals are also more vocal about the spread of misinformation and disinformation, particularly on social media platforms. This is a shared concern among many voters, but Democrats tend to express more concern about how misinformation may influence voter sentiment and election integrity.

There are some Democratic voters who worry about President Biden's mental fitness, particularly given his age. While this is a worry that many don’t express publicly, those that do fear it could deter Democrats from supporting him in 2024.

Many Democrats also fear the party is not doing enough to address pressing issues like racial and social justice. They fear Biden’s unwillingness to support Palestine or failing to engage with social issues could impact Democratic voter sentiment.

Democratic voters also have deep concerns about the potential impact of a Trump win on the nation's standing in the world. They fear if Trump returns to power, the U.S. may align more with Putin's Russia, which could have consequences for international relations and national security. There is also a strong sentiment among Democratic voters that a potential Trump win could lead to authoritarian rule.

The discourse surrounding election integrity, particularly in relation to Secretary Antony Blinken's claim about China interfering in U.S. elections, is contentious. The sentiments expressed fall along partisan lines and the intensity of these sentiments seems to have escalated after Blinken's claim.

Prior to Blinken's comment, discussion was centered mostly on allegations of domestic election fraud. The 2020 presidential election is still a highlight among many voter conversations. There are still accusations of criminal activity, with many blaming the former president, Donald Trump, for orchestrating a conspiracy to influence the election. This was a recurrent theme in many online comments.

Overall, sentiment toward election integrity is largely negative, with many expressing anger, frustration, and a sense of betrayal. Voter comments suggest a deep-seated mistrust in the electoral system and the political establishment on both sides. There are also calls for ensuring fair elections, with some suggesting measures like paper ballots and identification requirements.

After Blinken's claim, the discourse became even more heated. Allegations of election fraud continue, with some now also linking them to foreign interference, particularly from China. Sentiment is still largely negative, but there is now also a sense of fear and urgency. Many express the need for immediate action to protect the integrity of U.S. elections.

Based on MIG Reports data, most of the public is more worried about domestic interference than foreign interference in the 2024 election. This is evident from numerous references to the 2020 election, during which many allege domestic fraud was a significant issue.

There is a strong narrative among Republicans around a belief that the election was stolen. Some blame key figures in the Republican party for not supporting Donald Trump. Democrats seem more likely to be skeptical that Trump himself attempted to tamper with the election and secure an illegitimate presidency against the will of the people.

The discussion about NYC union workers and their support for Trump swept across social media recently, with videos of workers chanting, “USA” and “We want Trump!” While the former president visited with blue collar constituents, he told them he is going to try to win New York and is hopeful about his prospects.

Union Workers chanting “We Want Trump” and “USA”

pic.twitter.com/y7lGeIlvIT

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 25, 2024

Viral videos of voters in a notoriously blue New York City generated enthusiasm and approval among workers on the ground and voters viewing online. Trump’s surprise visit to the NYC construction site and positive reactions from Teamsters suggests strong support within that sector. Commenters say this indicates Trump may have significant backing from working-class voters in the city, which could impact the election if those voters turn out in large numbers.

Some believe this display of support indicates a shift in the traditional political alignment of unions, which typically lean Democratic. They suggest Trump's populist approach and focus on job creation resonates with these workers. There are suggestions NYC union worker enthusiasm potentially signals a broader trend of support among working class Americans.

The fact that Trump is actively meeting voters in NYC, while Biden is viewed as frequently confused and unable to make relatable campaign appearances, could also sway voters towards Trump. Especially voters feel he is more engaged and connected with them.

Overall, the discussion suggests Trump's support among NYC union workers could be a good sign for Trump’s campaign, among other recent wins. However, the outcome will likely depend on a variety of other factors, including overall voter turnout and the level of support Democrats can maintain.

• Following Trump’s visit to NYC union workers, discussion jumped sharply as Trump support slightly climbed.
• Biden support on the topic of union workers wavered slightly more, despite Democrats historically capturing much of the union worker vote.

Democrat Lamentations

Those who vehemently oppose Trump reacted negatively to footage of union workers celebrating him. They label Trump a criminal and traitor, saying one video of a man shouting“F*** you” to Biden is not indicative of overall New Yorker sentiment. Reactions suggest progressive Democrats are incensed at the show of support for Biden.

Some Democrats express surprise and confusion over why union workers would support Trump, given their belief in his administration’s anti-union stance. They argue this public display of support may be limited to specific unions or industries, rather than reflecting a larger trend among union workers nationwide. Voter groups like union workers and even Gen Z, who many expect to support Biden, elicit skepticism from Democrats if they voice support for Trump. 

There are also suggestions the event was staged to make Trump support look stronger than it really is. This groups says it was astroturfed to counter the anti-Trump sentiments in NYC. There are also criticisms directed towards the workers themselves, with some suggesting any union worker supporting Trump is ignorant of his anti-union stance.

Potential Election Impact

Some people believe this union support is significant and could indicate shifts that may sway the results of the election. They argue union workers make up a significant portion of the workforce and their support could represent a larger trend among blue collar workers. Some also speculate that, should Trump get convicted by a New York jury, it could potentially increase his support with average Americans who view the trail as politicized.

Others, however, argue the support from NYC union workers is not representative of the broader population. They point out that NYC is generally liberal and that union support for Trump could be more of an anomaly than a trend.

Although some believe it could help shift traditionally Democratic states like New York towards the Republican column, others argue it’s unlikely given the overall political leanings of these states.

JUST IN: Donald Trump announces he is going to try to win the state of New York during a visit with Union workers at a construction site in Manhattan.

The workers could be heard saying “We Love Trump” as he made the announcement.

“We're very close in New York. I understand…… pic.twitter.com/5hqItz5JyH

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) April 25, 2024

After Trump’s comments saying he hopes to win New York, some voters are hopefully a showing like this could swing the vote in favor of Trump. They are also hopeful this sentiment is echoed across other unions and blue-collar workers in the US. Others, however, argue that Trump's policies do not align with the interests of union workers and express confusion and disbelief at the support he received in NYC.

There's also mention of union leader Bobby Bartels meeting with Trump and expressing a shift in political allegiance from Democrat to Republican due to dissatisfaction with Democratic policies over the past four years. This indicates a potential shift in voter sentiment among union workers.

MIG Reports analysis of Joe Biden's proposed plan to grant legal status to illegal immigrants who married U.S. citizens sheds light on the heated and polarizing debate around immigration policy in the United States. The discussion shows a clear divide in opinions about the Biden policy with little room for a neutral stance.

This Biden program would provide “mixed-status couples” exemption from deporting the spouse who is in the country illegally. Critics express deep-seated frustrations over the financial burden on taxpayers, perceived threats to national security, and prioritizing foreign interests over domestic issues. They call for stricter border control measures, notably the construction of a wall along the southern U.S. border, and express anger at what they perceive as a lack of action from political leaders to address these concerns. There are also allegations of corruption and misuse of funds intended for the construction of the border wall, further fueling the controversy. The issue becomes especially touchy for Americans who feel the real-world impact of Biden's economic policies.

Supporters of the proposed policy are reacting saying criticism is misdirected and more comprehensive immigration reform is necessary. They point out the shortcomings of a wall as a deterrent for illegal immigration, suggesting alternative border control measures. 

Implications on the Border Discussion

If Biden continues with the policy of granting work authorization to illegal alien spouses, it could potentially escalate the ongoing debate about immigration policies. This may lead to further polarization of public opinion, with one group arguing for the rights of these individuals and another group emphasizing the need to prioritize the interests of American citizens.

Sentiment towards border control measures is likely to remain contentious. Those advocating for stricter measures will likely stand firm in their beliefs, especially if the high number of illegal crossings does not cease. Those against a physical wall may push for more progressive immigration reform, claiming to focus on the root causes of migration and advocating for more humane treatment of immigrants.

Biden's policies on these issues will continue to be a focal point of political and public discussion, with sentiment likely to fluctuate in response to policy changes and ongoing events at the border.

Hollywood actor Alec Baldwin’s recent encounter with a pro-Palestine activist has generated sympathy from conservatives who typically criticize him. There are various reactions to Baldwin's interaction with a pro-Palestine protester, who goes by “Crackhead Barney,” in a deli. The altercation reflects the politically charged discourse around the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Anti-Israel progressives are highly critical of Baldwin's response, considering his reaction to support a Zionist perspective. Republicans and Democrats who support Israel are more likely to side with Baldwin, saying the protestor who calls herself “Crackhead Barney” acted inappropriately.

Many right leaning commentors express the sentiment that a person must be astonishingly distasteful and offensive to make conservatives defend Baldwin. A tweet from comedian Adam Corolla represents this common reaction on the right.

You know you’re crazy when you make Alec Baldwin seem chill.

Get a life, Crackhead. https://t.co/xCDaCV6c2u

— Adam Carolla (@adamcarolla) April 23, 2024

Leftists and Palestine sympathizers accuse Baldwin of being a Zionist because he would not comply with Crackhead Barney’s demand that he say “Free Palestine.” These activists argue standing with humanity should involve supporting the Palestinian evoke condemnations of Israel's actions. One person accused Baldwin of acting violently against the activist when he knocked the phone out of her hand.

The New York Post tweeted images of the altercation, generating reactions criticizing Crackhead Barney for such a public display. Many say she represents the kind of activist voters are growing irritated with and who pose problems within Joe Biden’s voter base.

Alec Baldwin’s scuffle with anti-Israel agitator ‘Crackhead Barney’ spilled out onto sidewalk outside NYC coffee shop, photos show https://t.co/mJP1Hra9Gl pic.twitter.com/igDtRBEbMn

— New York Post (@nypost) April 23, 2024

Overall, it seems many Americans are increasingly tired and becoming frustrated with continued anti-Irael protests and altercations.

• National sentiment toward Palestine sunk below both Israel and protest topics in the last week, reaching a low of 35%.
• Israel sentiment dipped to 38% percent as all three topics trend downward but remains higher than both protest and Palestine sentiment.

Voter Criticisms of Anti-Israel Activists

Anti-Israel protests continue across public events and streets, on university campuses, and in altercations like the one involving Alec Baldwin. As these demonstrations continue, American voters increasingly express several criticisms.

• Accusations of Antisemitism: One of the most common complaints is that these protests often cross the line into antisemitism and harassment of Jewish people.
• Disruption of Academic Activities: Critics argue say university protests disrupt regular academic activities, citing instances where universities have had to switch to online classes due to intense protests.
• Violence and Intimidation: Many identify violence and intimidation from protesters who increasingly harass and endanger students and uninvolved citizens.
• Support for Terrorism: Many Americans say pro-Palestine rhetoric promotes support for terrorist groups like Hamas.
• Disruption of Public Order: People seem weary of protests which lead to public disorder, often inconveniencing individuals and commerce.
• Impact on Relations with Israel: Some worry about the impact of protests on U.S.-Israel relations, fearing progressives may pressure Biden into abandoning Israel.
• Misinformation: Critics say protesters spread misinformation about the conflict, portraying Hamas as sympathetic and Israel as violent.

If pro-Palestine protests continue to irritate American voters, sentiment could sway negatively against Joe Biden, who is often perceived as harboring or being complicit in anti-Israel sentiment. After the Biden administration’s condemnation of recent violent university protests, Democrats may alternatively run the risk of alienating progressive anti-Israel voters.

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.

The Biden administration's recent rewriting of Title IX has sparked rage and objection from conservatives and moderates who worry about women’s safety. The changes effectively expand protections for transgenders on college campuses and strip due process for those accused of sexual harassment or assault.

Biden’s changes are a reversal of policies implemented during the Trump administration, which had narrowed the definition of sexual harassment and bolstered the rights of those accused. Now, many worry that college tribunals will threaten the accused’s ability to defend themselves. They also worry it could encourage more false accusations and incentivize universities to err on the side of harsher punishments.

• In the last two weeks, sentiment on transgender issues has fluctuated, dipping 40% prior to the Title IX changes.
• With a spike in conversation, sentiment received a slight bump to 45%, but flattened back out as conversations emerged.

Conversation is Negative but Progressives Celebrate

Much of the discussion MIG Reports analyzed expresses strong opposition to the changes. People argue this revision allows men or "transgender women,” to compete in women's sports and use women's locker rooms. Critics argue this undermines the fairness and safety of biological women and girls participating in sports.

Critics insist the physical differences between biological males and females give transgender athletes an unfair advantage in sports. They also express concerns about potential invasions of privacy in locker rooms. Despite protests insisting there are carveouts for sports, many interpret the language of Title IX to implicitly require transgender inclusion in sports.

Those opposed frame their arguments in terms of a perceived erasure or violation of women's rights. They argue the changes to Title IX are fundamentally at odds with the original intent of the legislation, which was to create equal opportunities for women in education and sports. They also call on any Democrats or liberals claiming to be feminists to stand up for biological women and girls.

Many conservative voices express dissatisfaction and call for lawsuits to reverse the changes. A tweet from political commentator Megyn Kelly reflects a strong sentiment among many right leaning voters who view the rise of transgender activism as an attack on women.

DO NOT EVER LET ANY DEMOCRAT TELL YOU THEY CARE ABOUT WOMEN’S RIGHTS EVER AGAIN IF THEY DO NOT STAND UP TO THIS ABOMINATION OF A TITLE IX REVISION.
These regs are a nuclear level attack on women’s rights and men’s due process rights. JOE BIDEN MUST GO.

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) April 19, 2024

Meanwhile, Democrats have largely applauded these changes. They view them as necessary to protect the rights of marginalized groups and address sexual harassment and assault in educational institutions. Many Democrats argue the changes reflect modern understandings of gender and the need to ensure equal access to education for all students. They also argue the changes will help to create a safer and more inclusive environment in schools and colleges.

Frequent Criticisms of Title IX Revisions

Some of the most vehement objections to Biden’s Title IX changes include:

Violation of Due Process

Critics argue there's an increased potential to violate the due process rights of the accused. They say the new rules will lead to a presumption of guilt by tribunals, removing the accused’s right to cross-examine their accusers.

Overreach of Federal Power

Some conservatives and libertarians argue the changes represent an overreach of federal power into local and state educational institutions. They believe decisions about how to handle sexual misconduct should be left to individual schools or states.

Infringement on Free Speech

There are arguments that lowering the bar for what is considered harassment will create enforced speech. If transgender athletes can invoke harassment for being misgendered, freedom of speech will be curtailed.

Endangering the Safety of Girls

Many insist these changes endanger the safety of female students as biological men enter their spaces. Critics say the new rules could increase accusations and punishments for misgendering transgender athletes threatening women’s safety.

Potential for False Accusations

Critics argue the changes could lead to increased discrimination and retaliation against women and false allegation victims. They argue it will be more difficult for the innocent to defend themselves.

Adverse Incentives for Schools

Some critics argue the changes lack clarity and could lead to confusion for schools trying to implement them. They also worry that schools, to maintain government funding, will enforce heavy-handed policies that hurt students.

Overall, reactions to the Biden administration's changes to Title IX reflect complex and conflicting views of gender rights and the government’s role in enforcing speech. These debates are likely to continue in the political arena, the courts, and in educational institutions across the country.

MIG Reports analysis has identified the recent pro-Palestine protests at Columbia University as part of a growing fracture within the political left’s culture. It also seems to be an ideologically isolating movement, sectioning off its adherents from ostensible allies on other issues.

Reports of anti-Israel protests at Columbia University have sparked significant controversy. Some Americans are outraged by these protests, labeling them as antisemitic and praising the White House for publicly condemning them.

• The arrest of Rep. Ilhan Omar's daughter at one of these protests has further fueled these sentiments.
• As a result of her daughter’s involvement, Omar saw a significant decrease in her public approval.

However, supporters argue the protesters are exercising their right to free speech, drawing parallels with other controversial issues, such as marijuana legalization and police brutality. Some question the actions of Columbia University's administration in response to the protests and argue the arrests of student protesters are excessive.

Many Americans express concerns about the safety of Jewish students amid these protests, with some comparing the situation to historical instances of antisemitism. However, others argue these concerns are overblown and the protests represent a legitimate critique of Israeli government policies, rather than an attack on Jewish people as a group.

In terms of political implications, these protests appear to reflect broader divisions in American society, and more specifically the Democratic Party. Supporters of the protests often align with progressive political movements, while critics of the protests often align with conservative ones.

Culturally, these protests have reignited debates about free speech and the limits of acceptable political discourse. They have also brought renewed attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, prompting Americans to grapple with complex questions of identity, history, and international relations.

How Americans are Reacting to Ongoing Protests

Factors that increase sentiment towards these protests include a sense of solidarity with the Palestinian cause, perceived injustices faced by Palestinians, and the desire for freedom of speech and expression on college campuses. In contrast, elements that decrease sentiment include reactions to antisemitism, violence or intimidation, and the disruption of academic activities.

The top discussions around the protests include debates about freedom of speech versus hate speech, the role of universities in policing student protests, the impact of these protests on Jewish students and the larger Jewish community. People also discuss the political implications, particularly in relation to U.S. foreign policy towards Israel and Palestine.

If current trends continue, protests will continue to increase, along with heightened tensions and potential conflicts in public locations. This could lead to a greater polarization of opinions, with the potential for these protests to become a significant political issue that may hurt Biden’s approval. Increased media attention could further fuel contentions as well, perpetuating friction.

In terms of policy implications, universities may need to develop clear guidelines for student protests. The public and alumni may demand institutions protect freedom of speech while ensuring the safety and well-being of all students. Policymakers and Democrat politicians may also be pressured to address this anti-Israel voter group as the election draws near.

A recent Supreme Court decision not to hear the Mckesson v. Doe case has sparked a robust online discussion. Much of the commentary seems to be from liberal and left leaning voters who support BLM and other social justice protests.

The case in question involved DeRay Mckesson, a civil rights activist, who was sued by an anonymous police officer (Doe) who was injured during a protest Mckesson organized in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in 2016. The lawsuit alleged Mckesson was responsible for the injuries because he should have anticipated violent actions during the protest.

SCOTUS’ decision essentially upholds a lower court ruling that organizers of protests can be held responsible for violence or illegal actions that occur, even if they didn't directly participate in or endorse such actions. This decision extends to the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Critics argue this decision essentially criminalizes protest organization.

Many discussing this subject seem to misunderstand the court decisions, believing SCOTUS made it illegal to protest, when in fact the court had declined to hear a case, leaving a lower court's decision in place.

The event has also sparked conversation about politicized and weaponized justice. MIG Reports data suggests liberals and conservatives both entertain ideas that the government and courts could be weaponized – however they disagree about whom the weaponization is against.

• National sentiment towards SCOTUS is relatively high compared to protests and police.
• Sentiment towards all topics related to protests and prosecutions for protests has declined slightly in the last two weeks.

Liberals Emphasizing Mckesson’s Plight

Those arguing the decision infringes upon the First Amendment tend to lean liberal. They say it’s chilling the right to protest by making organizers potentially liable for actions they cannot control. They see this as a move to criminalize dissent and express fear about the implications for democratic freedoms.

Some voice fears this could dissuade activists from organizing protests out of fear of legal repercussions. They argue holding organizers accountable for the actions of individuals within a protest is unfair and infringes upon the constitutional right to free speech and peaceful assembly.

Supporters of the decision argue protest organizers should be held accountable for any illegal activities that occur during their events. They believe this will deter violent protests and encourage peaceful assemblies. Although these voices tend to be more right leaning, there is much less discussion of the case among Republicans and conservatives.

Those who are discussing the case either blame Democratic leadership for lawlessness during protests or criticize Republican lawmakers for eroding democratic rights. The debate around this case highlights the partisan views many hold about protest rights, depending on the cause of the protest.

Contrasting Views of Weaponized Government

The politicized view of protests seems apparent when contrasting opinions about Mckesson v. Doe and January 6 prosecutions. Those who view the events of January 6 as an attack on democracy demand protesters be held accountable. These individuals frequently use terms such as "insurrectionists," "traitors," and "seditious clowns," and appear to be among the same group discussing the Mckesson v. Doe decision.

Liberal and progressive voters are more likely to call for the arrest, conviction, and jailing of J6 participants. This group also includes elected officials who they believe incited or supported the attack like former President Trump. Many demand a thorough investigation and express satisfaction when they see arrests and convictions.

Progressive and liberal voters express a sense of double standards in how different protests are handled. They say law enforcement response to the J6 demonstrators was less severe than responses to Black Lives Matter protests.

Conservatives View J6 Convictions as Weaponized

In contrast to liberals who claim lenience for Mckesson and maximum consequences for J6 defendants, conservatives view the courts as weaponized in the opposite direction. This group is more likely to claim J6 demonstrators were merely exercising their right to protest. They criticize the media and Democrats for applauding J6 convictions while shrugging off BLM protest violence.

Right leaning voters believe there is bias in the FBI's actions, specifically in the context of the prosecution of J6 participants. They contrast this with leniency towards leftist activists who commit crimes and violence in the name of Black Lives Matter of Palestine.

Conservatives are more likely to believe in the existence of the Deep State – a group of unelected bureaucrats manipulating the government. They express frustration and mistrust towards the government and politicians who politicize federal agencies and the court system.

There is a strong perception that conservatives are being unfairly targeted and labeled "domestic terrorists" by the FBI and other institutions.