Emerging plagiarism allegations against Vice President Kamala Harris, particularly regarding her 2009 book “Smart on Crime,” are causing uproar. Revelations from investigative journalist Chris Rufo bring scrutiny to Harris’s political credibility and leadership.

EXCLUSIVE: Kamala Harris plagiarized at least a dozen sections of her criminal-justice book, Smart on Crime, according to a new investigation. The current vice president even lifted material from Wikipedia.

We have the receipts. 🧵

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) October 14, 2024

Voter conversations bring up concerns about Harris’s integrity and reveal sentiment among key Democratic constituencies. This analysis focuses on how the plagiarism accusations may impact public trust, voter turnout, and strategic implications for the upcoming election.

Impact on Voter Turnout

The potential impact on voter turnout, particularly among key demographics like men and minorities, is a significant concern for Harris’s campaign. Discussions indicate disengagement among black men, a historically crucial voter base for the Democratic Party.

Comments like, "You haven’t done a thing for black men in almost 4 years" illustrate a sense of betrayal, with voters feeling disillusioned by her lack of meaningful action. Linguistic analysis suggests voter dissatisfaction could lead to a 10-15% decline in turnout among black male voters.

Moderates and Independents, who may have previously viewed Harris favorably, are now showing signs of disillusionment. As much as 20% of these voters reacting to plagiarism accusations may abstain from voting or shift their support away from Harris. The escalating opposition to Harris may also energize conservative and right-leaning voter bases, potentially increasing their turnout as they mobilize against her.

Erosion of Trust

The language voters us on social media suggests a severe erosion of trust in Kamala Harris’s leadership and credibility. Accusations of dishonesty and insincerity dominate the discourse. Voters accuse Harris of being a "liar" and pandering to specific groups while failing to deliver meaningful policies.

People say things like, "you are literally destroying our country" and "she will never be President." There is growing frustration and skepticism among voters about her authenticity, despite little press coverage.

The plagiarism allegations compound voter distrust, aligning with long-standing criticisms of her tenure as a prosecutor and her broader political career. Approximately 65-70% of the discourse expresses distrust in Harris, further weakening her stance among voters.

Vice President Kamala Harris’s released an "Opportunity Agenda for Black Men,” drawing a swift ratio from X users reacting with incredulity. Less than 24 hours after posting the proposal, it had 23 million views, 35,000 replies, and only 28,000 likes.

Black men deserve a president who cares about making their lives better. pic.twitter.com/cUCdsvvYZ6

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) October 15, 2024

In the proposal, Harris promises to:

• Give black men “fully forgivable” $20k loans.
• Provide “pathways to become teachers.”
• Protect the cryptocurrency investments of black men.
• Create a “national health initiative.”
• Legalize marijuana.

Most voters react to the proposal as racial pandering and empty promises, further damaging Harris’s image with the very group she’s attempting to court.

• 67% of voters distrust Harris's motives, calling the agenda empty pandering.
• 38% specifically criticize race-based crypto protections.
• 60% of non-black voters say Harris should focus on fixing her immigration policies before pandering to black men.
• 15% are cautiously optimistic but demanding more transparency.

Following Harris debuting the Opportunity Agenda, voter sentiment toward her dropped noticeably.

• Harris’s overall sentiment in the last seven days averaged 43%, dropping to 42% today.
• Specifically, sentiment on the economy dropped from 43% a week ago to 41% today and racial issues dropped from a high of 45% in the last week to a drastic 34% today.

Disingenuous Racial Politics

During the 2024 campaign season, Harris has been known for either remaining vague on her policy positions, piggybacking on Trump-Vance proposals like “No Tax on Tips” and child tax credits, or pandering with grandiose promises.

Harris’s Opportunity Agenda fits into this pattern, promising forgivable loans to black entrepreneurs and cryptocurrency protections specifically for black men. These, many say, are both incredible racial pandering and potentially illegal.

Around 67% of voters reacting are skeptical about Harris’s motivations with the proposal—this is supported by the glaring ratio on her rollout post. People point to her record as California's Attorney General, where she failed to deliver on promises related to criminal justice reform and economic empowerment. Many black voters echo sentiments like, "You are only 'supporting' Black men because you need votes."

The proposal also gained a slew of memes, mocking what many view as disingenuous and infantilizing promises to black voters.

😭😭 pic.twitter.com/SSKFTIftxC

— AtBrightone 📈 🐢 (@Atbrightone) October 15, 2024

Harris Finally Gets Specific on Policy, Too Specific

The proposal to forgive loans for black entrepreneurs and regulate cryptocurrency markets are particular points of ire for many online. Nearly 40% of those discussing the proposal specifically mention their criticism for race-specific provisions in cryptocurrency. And even more are reacting to race-restricted forgivable loans.

pic.twitter.com/B8H3xa7G8g

— The Right To Bear Memes (@grandoldmemes) October 15, 2024

Many voters view this proposal as part of a broader trend in the Democratic Party of focusing on specific groups rather than addressing the needs of nation holistically. Critics view these promises as merely symbolic, with little bearing on the real economic struggles black men, and all Americans, face.

Conservatives also argue Harris’s focus on niche financial reforms—like protections for black men in cryptocurrency —swings too far in the opposite direction from her typical evasion when asked about policy specifics.

People say things like, "Why is crypto suddenly a priority for black men when inflation is through the roof?" Voters express frustration that Biden-Harris policies have created the economic situation and skyrocketing inflation that Americans find themselves in. They view meager promises like “protecting crypto” as completely meaningless amid looming economic strain.

Legal Concerns and Unconstitutionality

The loudest outcry against the Opportunity Agenda is against forgivable loans for black entrepreneurs, which raises legal concerns about discrimination and the Constitution. Thousands of voters push back, suggesting racial policies like these probably violate anti-discrimination laws or violate the Constitution.

Also unconstitutional https://t.co/O7q6irT2UT

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) October 15, 2024

While Harris and her supporters argue targeted programs are necessary to correct racial injustice, most Americans, including some black voters, say Harris wants to undermine equality under the law. Many point out that implementing such a racial policy would likely open up a Harris-Walz administration to lawsuits and harsh public backlash.

Immigration Overshadows Opportunity

In response to the Opportunity Agenda, many people bring up Harris’s broader track record—particularly on immigration. As the Biden administration’s "border czar," Harris faces fierce criticism for allowing an unchecked stream of illegal immigrants, including gangs, murderers, and rapists into the country.

Around 60% of non-black voters are angry about Harris’s lack of urgency over the border. They say the influx of illegal immigrants which strains American communities like Aurora, CO and Springfield, MI are more damaging to black communities than the problems which the Opportunity Agenda would attempt to solve.

Voters are frustrated that Harris is focusing on race-specific economic initiatives while neglecting critical national concerns like border security. They say her failures undermine any credibility she may have in addressing the economic challenges facing black men.

"Mass immigration does not contribute to the dreams and aspirations of Black Americans," one comment states, condemning Harris for making future promises while failing to solve current problems within her control as the sitting Vice President.

The Hollow Promises of the Democratic Party

Voters view Harris’s Opportunity Agenda as just the latest disposable promise made by Democrats to the black community—most of which go unfulfilled. A dramatic 67% of voters doubt Harris’s ability to deliver, questioning her sincerity. Black voters particularly are weary of politicians making grand promises during election cycles but reneging once in office.

This growing disillusionment among black voters is consistent with recent MIG Reports analysis showing Trump gaining with minorities. These voters are beginning to view Harris’s policies as token gestures rather than meaningful reforms.

In the first day after debuting the plan, Harris’s Opportunity Agenda has decisively been shot down by voters who question her authenticity and competence. Legal concerns about discrimination, continued disapproval about identity politics, and her administration’s failures on economic and immigration issues all suggest Harris is failing to make inroads with any American men.

Kamala Harris’s recent commitment to eliminate Columbus Day and replace it with Indigenous People’s Day caused a cultural and political firestorm. Her recent remarks coupled with resurfaced footage of her 2021 address condemning the “shameful” history of the United States draw sharp criticism.

Kamala Harris: I'll eliminate Columbus Day, make it Indigenous People's Day pic.twitter.com/sM2Um8YrFF

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) October 14, 2024

While some applaud Harris’s efforts as a step toward historical accountability, many see her rhetoric as politically motivated and divisive. MIG Reports analysis reveals how her statements fracture the electorate and raise questions about her fitness for office.

Emotional Reactions and Backlash

Harris’s comments elicit many reactions, but prominent emotions include frustration and anger. Americans view her remarks a dangerous departure from traditional American values. They say eliminating Columbus Day would be an unnecessary erasure of the nation’s history. This sentiment is exacerbated with reshares of her 2021 condemnation of America’s “shameful” past.

Kamala Harris on Columbus Day:

"European explorers ushered in a wave of devastation, violence, stealing land, and widespread disease" pic.twitter.com/3XijDf5Ldo

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) October 14, 2024

Critics accuse Harris of pandering to the progressive left and using identity politics to curry favor with marginalized groups while alienating the broader electorate. Many see her comments as part of a larger trend of political correctness run amok, where prioritizing minority narratives undermines the nation’s cultural heritage. Many Americans are disillusioned, betrayed, and call Harris inauthentic.

Demographic Patterns

In reactions, there’s a clear generational and ideological divide. Older, more conservative voters—many of whom respect traditional American history—are overwhelmingly critical of her stance. Often white, rural or suburban voters, they perceive Harris’s comments as an attack on history and American values. For them, Columbus Day symbolizes respect for American achievements and national pride.

Younger voters, particularly urban and minority voters, are more supportive of Harris’s position. They like her progressive messaging and would rather recognize Indigenous People’s Day as a long-overdue step toward historical justice.

However, these divides are far from unanimous. Many younger voters question whether Harris’s actions are substantive, or a pandering gesture meant to placate activists. Some say she will not actually address the issue. Ohers prioritize more important progressive causes like economic inequality or healthcare reform. This ambivalence suggests a disconnect between Harris’s rhetoric and the progressives she is trying to appeal to.

Criticism Over Progressive Revisionism

Harris’s statements can be seen as microcosm of overall cultural and political divisions in American society. Her comments about Columbus Day, rather than fostering unity, have further polarized the electorate.

Conservatives see her position as part of a progressive assault on the country’s historical foundations, stoking frustration over cultural erosion and political overreach. This group sees Harris’s leadership as representing the dangers of progressive politics. They decry the constant reexamination of history as undermining national identity.

Harris’s identity as a woman of color in a high political office adds another layer to the criticism. Many view her ascent as emblematic of a Democratic Party which prioritizes identity politics over competence and leadership.

Voters view Harris as an out-of-touch figure more focused on equity than the issues facing everyday Americans. Many are more worried about the economy, healthcare, and national security. This incident, therefore, damages her standing with many voters.

Linguistic Patterns and Symbolism

The language Harris’s critics use is mostly defensive and fearful. They use words like “betrayal,” “erasure,” and “political correctness,” revealing anxieties about the direction of the country.

Many see Harris’s actions as part of a broader cultural battle over traditional American values. They view history and traditions as under siege by a progressive agenda that prioritizes equity and over the good of the nation.

Even among supporters, there is a noticeable wariness about the sincerity of Harris’s stance. They use words like “performative” and “empty rhetoric,” suggesting they doubt her commitment to the ideas she speaks about. This skepticism heightens with inconsistencies that paint her as a politician curating her appearance rather than taking a stance.

Recently, Barack Obama appealed to black men, addressing them as "brothas," urging support for Kamala Harris. MIG Reports analysis shows wide-ranging and polarized reactions on social media.

NEW: Former President Barack Obama says the "brothas" aren't turning out for Kamala Harris like they did for him.

The comments from Obama came during an event at the University of Pittsburgh where Obama sounded the alarm on black voters.

"We have not yet seen the same kinds of… pic.twitter.com/v77CHcOv2A

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 10, 2024

The response to Obama’s call brings up issues of identity, representation, and disillusionment within the black community—particularly black men. While there is support for and skepticism toward Obama's message, many raise questions about the larger implications of Democrats losing critical voter groups.

Reaction Trends

Skepticism and Criticism

Around 65-70% of reactions to Obama’s comments are skeptical or outright critical. Voters question Kamala Harris's authenticity as a representative of black Americans, citing concerns that her background and political record do not resonate with the struggles of black men.

Critics largely perceive Obama’s lecture as political manipulation, designed to rally votes without offering meaningful engagement with their concerns. The criticism extends to both Obama and Harris, with many expressing frustration that Democratic elites are disconnected from the economic and social struggles of the communities they claim to represent.

Support for Obama and Harris

Only 20-25% of voters react with support for Obama’s message. This group resonates with his call for racial solidarity. They view the appeal as a necessary rallying cry for empowering black leaders, emphasizing the importance of unity behind Harris.

Supporters believe voting for Harris represents a larger effort to secure political representation for marginalized voices, especially in a time of heightened political stakes. For these voters, Obama’s message carries the weight of moral and racial duty to uplift black leaders in positions of power.

Neutral or Indifferent Reactions

Another 10-15% make neutral or indifferent comments toward Obama’s appeal. They view his call as a standard political maneuver—lacking any significant personal relevance or emotional connection.

They perceive the plea as part of routine political rhetoric rather than a heartfelt call to action. For this group, the message does not resonate deeply enough to move their political allegiances or inspire any meaningful change in perspectives of Harris or the Democratic Party.

Identity and Representation

Across all discussions, the tension between identity politics and political authenticity is a recurring theme. Critical voters feel Obama used identity as leverage or as a political tool, with little regard for the true needs of black men.

Kamala Harris’s identity as a black woman is both a potential point of connection and a source of division. Many black voters feel her policies and political stances do not adequately address the challenges they face. A struggle between representation and authentic engagement is infused in skepticism about Obama's message.

Political Fatigue and Disillusionment

Voters also discuss political fatigue and disillusionment, especially among younger black voters. There is a feeling that Democratic leadership has failed to deliver on promises of change. People often mention economic instability, housing, and systemic inequality in their critical responses.

People are frustrated with empty rhetoric from political elites, with little tangible impact on their daily lives. This sense of betrayal and disillusionment has led to growing political apathy and a reluctance to engage in traditional political processes.

Fractured Political Loyalties

There is a fracture within the black electorate, with many black men feeling increasingly alienated from the Democratic Party. Skepticism toward Harris and the perceived disconnect between political leaders and the community leads to a shift in political loyalties.

This divide is particularly pronounced among younger voters, who are less likely to feel bound by traditional party lines. They are more inclined to question the authenticity and effectiveness of their political representatives.

Potential for Engagement

Despite overwhelming criticism and political fatigue, Obama's message still holds the potential to mobilize certain segments of the black electorate. For those who resonate with his call for unity, the appeal could serve as a rallying point for increased political activism.

However, high levels of skepticism and disillusionment may make it difficult for the Democratic Party to get engagement and voter turnout. Moving forward, the party will need to address these deeper concerns if it hopes to retain the support of black voters, particularly black men.

Social media discussions among Democratic voters reveal a growing divide in support for Harris versus Trump. Conversations contain strong emotional reactions based on personal beliefs and polarized opinions about the country’s future. MIG Reports analysis shows motivations behind Democratic voter preferences, their sentiments towards both candidates, and linguistic patterns characterizing conversations.

What Democrats are Saying

• 60-65% of Democrats are critical of Harris's leadership, particularly on immigration and economic issues.
• 35-40% of Democrats say they’re willing to support Trump, driven by frustration with the current economy and foreign policy.
• Conversations about both candidates are divided and emotionally charged, with strong language expressing support or dissatisfaction.

Support for Kamala Harris

Most Democrats support the Harris-Walz ticket—around 60-65%. These voters voice their intention to vote for Harris in November. Some of the top reasons for support include:

• Tax Policy: 45% of Democrats cite Harris’s tax policies, particularly the Child Tax Credit, as a reason for their backing. They see it as a benefit for middle-class families.
• Policy Alignment: 30% focus on abortion and DEI. Her stance on progressive issues resonates with this segment of the Democratic base.
• Party Loyalty: 25% express their loyalty to the Democratic Party, citing lifelong affiliation as their reason for supporting Harris-Walz.
• Experience: 15-25% value her experience as Vice President, viewing her as competent and capable of leading.

Support for Donald Trump

Despite his Republican affiliation, MIG Reports data suggests Donald Trump may gain votes from around 35-40% of Democratic voters. This contrasts sharply with only 15% of Republicans who say they would vote for Harris. The reasons voters cite in conversation include:

• Economic Policies: Of the 35-40% of Democrats willing to vote Trump, half emphasize his tax cuts and pro-business policies. They credit him with fostering economic stability.
• National Security: 30% of Democratic Trump supporters cite his stance on border security as a major factor driving their decision.
• Frustration with Harris: 20% crossing the aisle say they're unhappy with Biden-Harris policies on immigration and disaster response for Helene and Milton.

Sentiment and Emotional Tone

Harris Negativity

• Harris has majority support within her Party, but still faces significant criticism.
• A drastic 70% of Harris-related discussions include negative comments about her policies and leadership.
• The most frequent critiques mention her track record on immigration and a lack of competence as Vice President.
• Democrats use terms like “incompetence” and “disgrace” in Harris conversations.

Trump Polarization

• Discussion about Trump is divided, with 60% of comments positively noting his economic policies.
• 40% of Democrats talking about Trump are sharply critical of his past controversies and behavior.
• Trump supporters view him as a strong leader who can restore order, while detractors focus on his polarizing rhetoric and failures.

Swing States

In critical swing states, patterns are similar to national Democratic sentiment. Harris generally receives more support than Trump, but there is some variability compared to national trends.

Harris Support

In swing states, Harris's support varies more significantly, with Democratic approval swinging wildly between 30% and 70%.

• Reasons for support are largely consistent, mentioning social issues, tax policies, and her experience as VP.
• However, the intensity of this support fluctuates more among swing state voters.
• This variability likely reflects the more competitive nature of these states, where voters may feel less firmly aligned along party lines.

Trump Support

Trump gains higher support in some swing states. Some reports show up to 55% of early voting favoring Trump.

• Higher Trump support reveals heightened dissatisfaction with Democratic leaders on immigration and economic issues.
• Trump supporters in swing states cite his strength on national security and economic policies.
• Democratic support is likely strongest in these battleground areas compared to national support, which is dampened by deeply blue areas.

Similarities

Across both national and swing state discussions, the reasons for supporting each candidate remain consistent. Democrats like Harris for her social policies and progressive stances. But Trump gets mentioned for his economic policies and tough foreign policy. Voters nationwide express dissatisfaction with the Biden-Harris administration, particularly on immigration and disaster response.

Biggest Differences

The major difference is the level of support for each candidate. In swing states, Democrats may be more willing to cross party lines. Harris’s support indicates greater variability, suggesting she hasn’t locked in her entire base.

Trump’s support is significantly higher in some swing states, likely due to economic stressors in middle class populations and border states frustrated about immigration. Disparities underscore the unpredictable dynamics of this election, where voter sentiment is difficult to pin down and political allegiance is less fixed than in prior years.

Discussions among Republicans on social media provides insights into their voting preferences—and clear trends toward Trump. Through affirmative first-person language, reasons for candidate support, trending discussion topics, and linguistic patterns, analysis breaks down voter likelihood in the GOP.

Less than a month away from election day, Republicans overwhelmingly support Trump, and Harris gains minimal, largely negative attention from never-Trumpers. MIG Reports data echoes NYT-Sienna polling indicating only 9% of Republicans plan to vote for Harris.

What Voters are Saying

MIG Reports data shows:

• 85% of Republican voters express affirmative support for Donald Trump.
• 15% voice support for Kamala Harris.
• 75-90% of posts mentioning Trump voice optimism about his return to office.
• 80-85% of discussions regarding Harris are negative, critiquing her policies and performance.

This data suggests, despite his polarizing image and some establishment Republicans and RINOs voicing never-Trump sentiments, most Republicans plan to vote Trump. It also undermines mainstream media and Democratic narratives suggesting Republicans are so frustrated with Trump, they’re crossing the aisle.

New Kamala ad airing in Pennsylvania depicts a "lifelong Republican," and "former Trump voter" grilling on a Blackstone, professing his newfound support for Kamala Harris.

Only one problem: he never voted for Trump in a general election. pic.twitter.com/5Wg1jAwqKp

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) October 4, 2024

Anti-Trump Republicans Vote Harris

Republican discussions prominently feature affirmative, first-person language confirming support for Donald Trump. They say things like, "I’m already voting for Trump" and "Trump is the only one who can fix this country." This shows a high level of personal commitment among GOP voters who believe in his leadership and vision for America.

Discussions about Kamala Harris rarely include direct affirmations of support. When voter mention her, it is often in a cautious tone, with statements like “I’ll vote for Harris just to stop Trump.” This suggests Democratic support from Republicans is driven by animosity toward Trump or the MAGA coalition.

Reasons for Voting Preferences

• Republicans say they support Trump for his economic record, with 65% referencing the lower unemployment rates and market stability during his administration.
• Immigration and national security are also significant support drivers. Voters view Trump's stricter border control policies as critical.
• Trump's combative stance against the establishment and mainstream media, seen as corrupt by many on the right, adds to his appeal.
• Harris supporters focus may mention social justice and abortion, but their support is driven by opposition to Trump rather than endorsement for Harris.

Discussion Trends and Sentiment

• 75-90% of discussions express confidence in Trump's ability to restore America. People mention “restoring order” and “fixing the mess.”
• 80-85% of Harris discussions are negative, criticizing her as incompetent—especially on immigration and disaster response.

Linguistic Patterns

Linguistic analysis reveals distinct patterns in the way voters discuss Trump and Harris.

• Trump supporters use highly emotive and assertive language, framing the election as a “battle” for America’s future.
• They use words like “betrayed,” “destroyed,” and “warrior” convey a strong sense of urgency and personal investment in the outcome.
• Harris voters in the GOP have a hesitant tone, where support is often expressed in defensive terms or framed as a necessary opposition to Trump.

Conclusion

The narrative emerging from Republican social media discussions shows strong loyalty and commitment to Trump. Support is driven by his track record on economic management, national security, and his anti-establishment stance.

While Kamala Harris garners some support, it is largely from never-Trumpers rather than supporters who appreciate her policies or leadership. The highly polarized nature of the language used to discuss these candidates reflects partisan ideological divides shaping the 2024 election.

Less than 30 days from the election, Democratic voters have mixed emotions about the Harris-Walz ticket. Analysis of social media discussions shows that, while a foundation of confidence exists, there are significant concerns about leadership, policy effectiveness, and party unity.

Democratic voter sentiment contains optimism, skepticism, disenfranchisement, and frustration. Left-leaning media like news interviews and Saturday Night Live have begun to make some criticisms of Harris and Walz, suggesting the media firewall may be cracking with increasing voter pressure.

BREAKING: SNL just went savage on Tim Walz's disastrous VP debate performance.

DOUG EMHOFF: “Tim will be fine. It's not like he's gonna say something crazy.”

TIM WALZ: “I've become friends with school shooters!” pic.twitter.com/esLOpdATc1

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) October 6, 2024

Summary of Findings

• Democratic voters express dual sentiments about Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.
• Most express confidence in the ticket’s ability to win, driven by key issues like abortion, gun violence, and economic stability.
• However, confidence is counterweighted by skepticism and pessimism, rooted in leadership concerns, disenfranchisement, and disconnect from voters.
• Themes of unity and frustration emerge as voters struggle over supporting candidates they feel have not addressed their concerns.

Confidence in the Ticket Winning

Many Democrats express confidence in Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, citing their track record on the economy, gun violence, and abortion as reasons for optimism. There is a clear belief that Harris and Walz have the potential to win. Voters talk about mobilization and turnout efforts.

Discussions include commitment to vote and collective determination. This sentiment is buoyed by a narrative of continuity and leadership, as voters want to continue the current trajectory and emphasize Democratic values.

However, much of the optimism is muted as people acknowledge the challenges of maintaining hope for a victory. These discussions reveal a tempered belief in success, where phrases like, “We need a deal maker,” are coupled with critiques of the broader political landscape. These Democrats feel it’s possible to win, but not guaranteed. They recognize the rhetorical limitations of Harris and Walz and sinking popularity.

A growing number of Democrats are expressing doubt or pessimism regarding Harris’s chances. These discussions assert that Harris and Walz are disconnected from the realities of working-class voters and have failed to address critical issues. Phrases like, “How can we win like this?” reflect a sense of disillusionment with leadership. This growing doubt exists in all groups of Democrats from average voters to pundits and political leaders.

Persistent Worries and Disenfranchisement

The most striking trend among Democrats is a sense of disenfranchisement and persistent worry. Many feel let down by party leadership, with comments frequently pointing to Harris-Walz failures in addressing pressing concerns.

People mention things like inflation, immigration, and the response to Hurricane Helene. There is frustration in phrases like, “They left thousands of people to die,” calling out the lack of accountability and responsiveness from Democratic leaders.

There is also concern among some key demographics, particularly minority communities. They feel neglected and lied to, further amplifying feelings of disenfranchisement.

Similar Arguments and Themes

Democrats also criticize Harris and Walz’s leadership, voice concerns about party unity, and a call for a new direction. Voters are frustrated with inaction by Harris and Walz who fail to take meaningful action on the economy, crime, and immigration. Many suggest Harris and Walz have not done enough to earn voter trust.

Party unity also emerges as a key concern, with some calling for a more concerted effort to consolidate Democratic support ahead of the election. While many are frustrated with the leadership, there are also voices urging the party to rally behind Harris and Walz to avoid a fractured base. Phrases like, “We need to strengthen our efforts,” reflect a recognition that internal divisions could hinder the party’s chances of success.

Finally, many want a new direction within the Democratic Party. Voters call for candidates who are more connected to grassroots movements and less beholden to traditional party politics. Comments such as, “Let’s stop voting for the party and start voting for the people,” capture the sentiment that the current leadership is not fully aligned with the needs and values of the Democratic base. This suggests a more authentic, people-centered approach—like that of RFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard—may appeal more to moderate Democrats.

As the 2024 election approaches, the Republican National Committee (RNC) is making a concerted effort to ensure election integrity, recruiting more than 200,000 volunteers and 5,000 attorneys. These actions have sparked significant discussion across social media, with voters responding to grassroots support mobilization and the RNC’s legal efforts. This analysis explores the range of reactions, breaking down public sentiment, enthusiasm, and deeper trends in voter behavior.

Key Findings

• 65-75% of discussions support the RNC’s efforts, emphasizing empowerment and the need for election integrity.
• 15-25% express skepticism, particularly about the RNC’s true intentions, suspecting voter suppression tactics.
• 5-15% remain indifferent or neutral, questioning the effectiveness of the efforts.
• 60-70% show heightened enthusiasm, particularly older voters, conservatives, and rural populations.
• 55-65% highlight the RNC’s potential to sway undecided voters in key battleground states.

Sentiment Breakdown

The dominant sentiment in response to the RNC’s recruitment is positive, at least 65% of Americans express support. Many conservative voters, especially in rural areas and older demographics, feel empowered by these efforts and view them as critical to protecting election integrity.

A significant portion of younger conservatives also responds positively, with around 40% citing transparency and the need to address potential electoral injustices. Conservative minorities, including black conservatives, resonate with this narrative, making up about 30% of the positive reactions.

However, there is also a significant degree of skepticism. Around 20% express concerns that the RNC’s recruitment drive may be a guise for voter suppression tactics, particularly targeting marginalized communities. Critics say the resources allocated to these efforts might be better spent addressing more immediate electoral concerns, with some describing the initiative as a power retention strategy rather than a genuine attempt to ensure fair elections.

Around 15% are neutral or indifferent. These users acknowledge the RNC’s efforts but express doubt about their effectiveness or question whether such initiatives will substantially influence their voting behavior.

Enthusiasm and Turnout Trends

The RNC’s recruitment drive has energized the GOP base, particularly in rural areas. These voters view election integrity as a pressing issue and 65% voice a sense of urgency and enthusiasm. They suggest the initiative is likely to lead to increased voter turnout, especially from groups that already feel strongly about preserving electoral fairness.

Many express confidence that the RNC’s efforts will boost turnout in key swing states. Where voters distrust the process. Around 60% believe these recruitment efforts could influence undecided voters and help Republicans gain ground in traditionally blue areas. Around 55% view this as an opportunity to counter Democratic election narratives, further driving enthusiasm among conservative voters.

Deeper Trends and Voter Behavior

The RNC’s recruitment campaign taps into deeper narratives of empowerment, institutional distrust, and working-class disillusionment. Many are excited for grassroots mobilization, expressing pride in taking an active role in the electoral process.

This narrative may signal a shift in voter engagement, with a growing focus on local participation and community-driven activism.

Doug Emhoff, the husband of Vice President Kamala Harris, is embroiled in controversy after accusations surfaced that he previously assaulted a former girlfriend. Typically, this type of story would grab headlines and dominate election discussions. Especially after recent media coverage of Emhoff praising him for “redefining masculinity.”

NEW: Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff accused of physically assaulting his ex-girlfriend, days after MSNBC host Jen Psaki said Emhoff was “reshaping masculinity.”

According to the Daily Mail, Emhoff hit a woman so hard that she physically spun around.

New details also reveal that… pic.twitter.com/dBPc8rcBL5

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 2, 2024

However, instead of major political scandal, voter awareness and media coverage of Emhoff’s alleged behavior has been muted. MIG Reports data shows many voters are not discussing this story, many news outlets are not covering it, and of those who are, a majority dismiss it.

Voter Awareness Seems Low

Amid many other major political and world events, discussions of recent Emhoff allegations are low. One possible explanation for the low discussion volume regarding Emhoff could be the major news story saturation. But MIG Reports analysis shows a similar, seemingly trivial story, regarding voter reactions to J.D. Vance's physical appearance following the VP debate is high, especially his beard as a physical representation of his identity in politics. This suggests low discussion of Emhoff may be more related to lack of media coverage.

Data gathered over a two-day period shows that online conversations mentioning Doug Emhoff’s alleged behavior generated between 200 and 300 comments. In contrast, discussions about border security during that same period reached nearly 10,000 mentions.

• Discussion of Doug Emhoff allegations: 200-300 over two days
• Discussion of border security: nearly 10,000 over two days

Of those mentioning Emhoff broadly, 57% indicate awareness of the allegations. This stands in sharp contrast to the sustained national focus on topics like Haitian migrants or Trump’s recent comments about removing their protected migrant status.

NEW - In an exclusive interview with @NewsNation @AliBradleyTV

Trump says he would revoke the temporary protective status of Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio.

Bradley: So you would revoke the temporary protected status?

Trump: Absolutely. I'd revoke it, and I'd bring… pic.twitter.com/kqxlmNU67A

— Libbey Dean (@LibbeyDean_) October 3, 2024

The Media’s Strategic Silence

Americans increasingly do not trust the media in how it reports stories or which stories it chooses to report. Around 62% of voters criticize the media for selectively focusing on personal scandals like this while ignoring “substantive issues” that impact the nation. This perspective is largely held among left leaning voters.

Republicans, however, are also critical of the media. They say mainstream outlets are not giving the Emhoff story the same level of attention they would if a Republican figure were involved. Conservatives say, if this had been a Republican's spouse, media outlets would be running continuous coverage. And 65% of this group sees the media’s lack of coverage as an example of partisan favoritism and selective reporting.

Democrats Versus Republicans

Reactions to the Emhoff story are partisan. Among conservatives, 75% voice distrust in Emhoff’s character, viewing these allegations as believable and evidence of hypocrisy within the Democratic Party. They link this incident to a larger narrative of Democratic moral failures, especially when juxtaposed with the Party’s vocal stance on gender rights and advocacy for women.

It's absolutely hilarious how Doug Emhoff is basically sent around on the campaign trail to call Trump a "misogynist" and a woman hater.

Today, it was revealed that he "forcefully" slapped around his ex-girlfriend.

(In addition to cheating on his ex-wife with their nanny.) pic.twitter.com/GttaqYop5a

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) October 2, 2024

Many point out Democratic moral movements like #MeToo, saying if the allegations are true, Emhoff and Harris by extension are disingenuous at best. Some also point out that Kamala Harris herself only required allegations before condemning Justice Brett Kavanaugh at his SCOTUS confirmation in 2019.

The Kavanaugh hearings last year opened old wounds for many survivors of sexual assault. Allegations must always be taken seriously. pic.twitter.com/zNhw5skC6I

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) September 17, 2019

Democratic voters are far less engaged with this story. Around 60% of left-leaning commenters actively downplay the allegations or defend Emhoff. They frame the accusations as a smear campaign designed to undermine Harris’s political standing. For them, the story is seen as a distraction from more critical issues, such as policy and governance. They either suggest the allegations or false or dismiss them as inconsequential—further drawing conservative accusations of hypocrisy.

Reactions within Small Pockets of Awareness

Among the limited group discussing the allegations, reactions vary.

• 29% are outraged, noting the limited scrutiny Emhoff receives compared to Republican figures.
• 21% of voters show indifference, arguing a politician’s personal life, including the behavior of their spouse, should not define their ability to govern.
• 70% of 18-34 voters blame the media for sensationalizing personal scandals, viewing such coverage as an unnecessary invasion of privacy.
• 58% of older voters want more personal accountability from public figures, particularly those close to the vice president.

Likely Minimal Impact on the Election

MIG Reports analysis suggests the Emhoff allegations are unlikely to play a significant role in shaping voter behavior or altering the trajectory of Harris’s candidacy. The issue simply hasn’t gained enough traction to make a substantial impact.

Given that 57% of voters who were aware of the story are already dismissing it as politically motivated, and with such a small volume of commentary overall, this story is not likely to sway Independent voters or motivate a shift in voter sentiment. The fact that more significant issues, such as border security and inflation, are dominating voter attention makes it unlikely that Emhoff’s personal life will become a deciding factor in the election.