Election fallout continues as Democrats, liberals, progressives, and left-leaning Americans dissect Harris’s loss and assign blame. MIG Reports suggests most blame goes to party leadership, strategic failures, and a growing disconnect Democratic priorities and voter needs. These issues can be summed up as:

• Out of touch with everyday voters' lives
• Too much focus on social issues and identity politics
• Disagreement on core policy issues

Kamala Harris Versus Joe Biden

Much of the Democratic discontent centers on Kamala Harris and Joe Biden accountable for the loss.

• Harris is often perceived as disconnected and ineffective, with many saying she failed to appeal to critical demographics such as progressives and minority groups.
• Biden faces criticism for not stepping aside sooner to allow a potentially more viable candidate to emerge.

Sentiment is especially strong among those who believe the Democratic Party’s existing leadership has become too entrenched in the establishment. There is also a generational divide, with younger progressives openly frustrated by the party's attempt at a centrist approach—one leftists feels is out of touch with pressing voter concerns.

This is not Kamala's fault. At all. And I won't entertain people who think it is. She's the most qualified candidate in history, and y'all still voted for a fascist promising dictatorship. https://t.co/8gxEGh0k68

— Small Screen Girl (@KiraJW) November 6, 2024

Fractured Identity Groups

While most conversations focus on domestic issues, some unique perspectives emerge.

• Certain Arab-Americans express dissatisfaction with Harris's stance on foreign issues like Palestine, seeing this as alienating key voter groups.
• The defection of Somali-Americans who endorsed Trump also causes consternation as Democrats discuss hemorrhaging base voters.
• Many also blame Trump’s gain in minorities and female votes, going as far as accusing Latino voters of misogyny.

The View says Latinos are misogynistic and blames them for Kamala’s election loss

Everyone and everything is to blame except Kamala…. 🤔 pic.twitter.com/y5XJVyLBzb

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) November 7, 2024

Amid voter disillusionment, a notable subset of progressives expresses resilience, urging continued focus on social justice, climate change, and core Democratic values. This group advocates for a renewed ideological commitment rather than the moderation that many see as an impediment to meaningful change.

Strategy Versus Voter Priorities

Economic concerns dominate discussions about where the party went wrong.

• Many feel Democrats focused too heavily on social issues at the expense of more pressing economic problems.
• Inflation, job security, and cost-of-living repeatedly emerge as voter priorities, highlighting the party’s failure to address middle- and working-class voters.

Criticism of identity politics is a strong theme, with many arguing an overemphasis at the expense of practical issues alienates potential voters. Middle- and working-class voters often adopt this critique, voicing frustration with a strategy that feels decadent.

Information Echo Chambers

Democrats also discuss the role of news and social media in shaping the party’s messaging.

• Many feel social media echo chambers reinforce insular party messaging, deepening polarization rather than broadening appeal.
• Traditional media outlets also face accusations of failing to adequately support the Democratic message.

Some comments claim media coverage was biased toward Trump or neglected the issues that resonate with progressive voters. This frustration with the media indicates the Democratic Party and its voters are experiencing a breakdown in communication.

Generation and Gender Dynamics

There is also a demographic divide when it comes to placing blame.

• Younger Democrats are especially critical of the party’s centrist campaign strategy. They want a progressive approach that distinguishes Democrats from conservatives.
• Many younger voters are disillusioned, viewing Democratic leadership as unwilling to pursue transformative policies that could address systemic inequalities.
• Women, particularly those concerned with abortion rights, highlight the implications of a Trump victory for women.
• They say gender-based messaging failed to emphasize the stakes of a setback for gender equality under Trump.

Generational and gender divides reveal competing priorities and expectations in the Democratic coalition. Disagreements, regardless of cause, highlight the Harris campaign’s failure to unite an increasingly diverse voter base under a cohesive message.

Third-Party Candidates

There is also resentment toward Democratic voters who opted for third-party candidates, blaming "spoilers" who fractured the left-leaning vote.

• Frustration with the lack of unity on the left is exacerbated by lingering disillusionment with the electoral process.
• Allegations of voter fraud or electoral manipulation surface in many discussions, often alongside calls for greater accountability and transparency.

Disaffected Democrats receive blame from the core base, while those disaffected blame the party for straying too far left.

Gen Z’s response to the 2024 presidential election paints a vivid picture of a generation grappling with disillusionment, skepticism, and a desire for cultural change. Social media discussions reveal how young voters process and articulate their choices, show patterns and perspectives that define this cohort’s political identity.

Frat boys celebrating the landslide win pic.twitter.com/6OuQJSF88b

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) November 7, 2024

Disenfranchised vs. Empowered

There is pervasive disenchantment from both major political parties among Gen Z voters. Roughly 30% of comments express disappointment with the current political landscape, feeling alienated by traditional party structures. T

here is a noticeable frustration with the Democratic Party abandoning working-class advocacy. But some Gen Z voters are drawn to the Republican Party’s shift under Trump, viewing it as a new populist and working-class coalition.

Political dissatisfaction underscores a lack of enthusiasm for major political figures, amplifying calls for structural change in the political arena.

Leadership

Trump supporters in this demographic frequently voice desire for strong, decisive leadership. They frame him as a protector of American values, national security, and economic stability. They link his policies with the American Dream and the aspiration of a safer, more secure nation.

Language in this group often exhibits patriotic fervor, expressing loyalty and admiration toward America. Trump is seen as a figure capable of realigning the nation’s priorities to focus on traditional American ideals, creating a sense of vindication and pride.

Despite being the demographic breaking for Harris at the highest rate, Gen Z voters online are voicing pushback against many of the progressive ideals Millennials fought for at their age.

Looks like Gen X delivered the White House to Trump. pic.twitter.com/ANv5Ahssu1

— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) November 6, 2024

Fake News

A shared distrust of mainstream media surfaces as a potent unifying theme across both pro-Trump and pro-Harris Gen Z voters. This skepticism stems from collective frustration with media biases and manipulations. Many view mainstream narratives as distortions of reality.

Trump supporters often feel demonized by the media, viewing coverage as subservient to a political agenda. Harris voters feel her media portrayal doesn’t align with the real issues facing their generation.

Distrust has become a rallying point that transcends party lines, as young voters increasingly question the reliability of traditional information sources and media-driven political narratives.

Raging Against the Machine

Anxiety over election integrity drives distrust, appearing frequently in conversations from both sides of the political divide. For Trump supporters, electoral cheating is a common concern, with discussions focusing on alleged malfeasance and voter interference.

Harris supporters express disillusionment with polling and media narratives that, they feel, fail to represent genuine public sentiment. This overlap in skepticism toward institutional reliability suggests a generational shift. Many Gen Z voters voice doubts about the transparency and fairness of the political process.

🗳️ Gen Z Voters: 👍 or 👎 after the election results were announced?

Here’s what they had to say about it... 🗣️

Let us know your thoughts in the comments, Gen Z’ers. 📲#genz #vote #voters #statenisland #siny pic.twitter.com/xY5DISgo7L

— SIAdvance (@siadvance) November 6, 2024

Identity Politics? Okay!

Divides over identity politics and policy emphasis also emerge clearly in these discussions.

Harris voters point to her reliance on identity policies over actionable policies. This sentiment is particularly strong among those who lean progressive but want concrete solutions to pressing issues.

Trump supporters emphasize nationalism and traditional values, viewing Harris’s platform as detached from American identity. The ideological split reveals generational how Gen Z voters prioritize identity and inclusivity versus policy impact and nationalism.

Progressive Tension

A segment of Gen Z shows a complex response to Harris’s background, especially in discussions that merge respect for her identity with criticism of her policies. While some are proud of her accomplishments, they question her leadership, creating tension between valuing diversity and prioritizing competence.

This conflicted view suggests an evolving perspective in progressive circles, where identity is honored yet separated from expectations for impactful governance. These sentiments reflect the delicate balance Gen Z voters face between representation and meaningful action.

For a week leading up to the election, MIG Reports data on voter conversations using "nation" versus "country" shows a chasm between conservative and progressive perspectives. While seemingly interchangeable, these terms reveal nuanced divides in how Americans conceptualize identity, values, and the nation’s future.

A Hidden Red Vote?

This divergence in language illustrates the ideological divide in how conservatives and progressives perceive the essence of American identity.

• Conservatives use “nation” as a unified ideal to defend, while “country” serves as a metric by which to judge current policies and governance.
• Progressives invoke “country” in a forward-looking critique, advocating for systemic reform, and view “nation” as a shared moral landscape.

These linguistic choices show distinct value differences and contrasting visions for the future of America. The polarized discourse mirrors growing complexities in American political identity today.

America the “Nation”

Conservatives

• Conservatives frame their language around ideas of tradition, loyalty, and protection.
• They use "nation" as a call to defend a unified American identity and preserve foundational values.
• This perspective includes a tone of urgency, rallying to safeguard the “nation” from cultural or political shifts they see as threats.
• There’s a nostalgic or protective tone, where the “nation” symbolizes an America they believe in.
• Those on the right associate American identity as intrinsic and immutable.
• The word “nation” encapsulates pride and a duty to uphold the sovereignty of America’s founding, often with an implicit expectation of cultural continuity.

Progressives

• Those on the left typically use “nation,” to emphasize a shared moral responsibility rather than a national identity.
• It's used to invoke a cultural identity based on ideology rather than tied to a vision of America as a sovereign nation.
• For progressive, “nation” is a collective aspiration, one that leans toward diversity and equality, rather than geopolitical entity with a certain set of values.
• The progressive use of “nation” often implies targeted language about the people of America within a more globalist worldview.

American the “Country”

Conservatives

• For conservatives, "country" often symbolizes the physical and political entity of the United States—its borders, laws, and governance.
• When they discuss "country," it’s frequently in contexts of sovereignty, security, and economic self-sufficiency.
• The term ties accountability and critique of governance failures, especially threats to American stability, like immigration or foreign policy decisions.
• Conservatives use "country" when discussing what needs defending—a place whose integrity must be protected against the erosion of traditional values.
• The tone is frequently critical when discussing policies that, in their view, compromise national unity or economic vitality.

Progressives

• For progressives, "country" is not only a political or geographic entity—it represents social movement toward DEI and systemic reform.
• The term is often used to critique social and economic policies they feel fail to support marginalized groups or uphold social justice.
• In their discourse, "country" becomes a symbol of an unreached potential, or an America that should be reimagined to serve equity and inclusion.
• Progressives see "country" as a reflection of the nation’s moral and social responsibilities and use it to emphasize the need for systemic changes
• Unlike conservatives, who see it as something to safeguard, progressives speak of "country" in terms of what needs improvement from within.

Donald Trump’s popular vote win shocked many people, and online discussions are ablaze with opinions on what his victory represents. People wonder whether it signals a clear mandate for his leadership.

Sentiments are as complex as they are intense, revealing viewpoints of Trump as a figure of change, defiance against the establishment, and the embodiment of traditional American ideals.

Steve Bannon has a message; pic.twitter.com/pIni6FH0ZZ

— Anonymous Patriot (@0331online) November 6, 2024

Hope, Anxiety, and Defiance

Hope for a Renewed America

• Sentiment: 70% of Trump supporters are positive, expressing excitement and optimism. They say a popular vote win grants Trump a mandate to lead America back to prosperity, strength, and unity.
• Key Themes: This group talks about Trump’s potential to fulfill promises of national well-being. They want to “Make America Great Again,” emphasizing economic growth, strong borders, and traditional values.

Distrust of the Ruling Class

• Sentiment: 25% of discussions voice rejection of the existing political elite. For them, Trump’s victory is a rebuke of the ruling class, which they perceive as corrupt, self-serving, and disconnected from everyday Americans.
• Key Themes: Commenters use terms like “elites” and “out-of-touch politicians,” contrasting them with Trump’s outsider image. People say the establishment neglects and betrays its constituents, and Trump’s team is the antidote.

Fear and Dismay

• Sentiment: 60% of anti-Trump comments express alarm and anxiety, fearing a reversal of progress on social and economic issues. They say Trump’s victory is not just a political setback but a moral and societal regression.
• Key Themes: This group discusses the potential outcomes of a Trump administration, fearing for their rights and democracy itself. They express concern that a majority of Americans have embraced Trump’s image and promises.

Online Language

Religious and Battle Imagery

• Interpretation: Many on the right invoke religious and battle verbiage. Comments like “God has a plan” or “this is a battle for America’s soul” frame the election as having both political and moral consequences.
• Significance: This language suggests religious people see themselves as voters and participants in a higher mission. The election becomes a spiritual, existential choice, where support signifies alignment with a “righteous” path.

Inclusive and Exclusive Language

• Interpretation: Trump voters mostly use inclusive pronouns (“we,” “us”), crafting a narrative of unity among Americans who want change. They refer to the opposition as “the elites” or “the out-of-touch,” dividing citizens and the ruling class.
• Significance: There is a tribalistic tone in politics, where supporting Trump opt voters into a kind of national identity. This language can intensify polarization, where opponents view the unity cause as antithetical to their values.

Nostalgia and Moral Imperatives

• Interpretation: Americans want to return to a simpler, more authentic American identity. They talk about “freedom,” “prosperity,” and “American Dream,” evoking nostalgic imagery, framing a new administration as a new dawn.
• Significance: Many say this election isn’t only about policies but about reviving a lost culture and identity. This language carries a moral weight, making visions for the future part of a duty to uphold traditional American values.

Rejecting the Ruling Class

Americans see Trump’s popular vote win as a rejection of the political establishment. They criticize elites for their being detached from ordinary American. This sentiment is not limited to Trump’s ardent supporters, it resonates with Independents and swing voters who feel politicians on both sides have failed to represent the people’s interests.

Desire to Instill MAGA

Along with rejecting elites, there is a strong desire to instill MAGA ideals. Trump’s base ties his second administration to reviving core values like patriotism, economic opportunity, and personal freedom.

Many vies MAGA as a condensed moniker for their desire to re-embrace American values and rebuild a brighter future. This desire is coupled with a sense of urgency, as many suggest Trump has only a short time to restore the practical and thematic trajectory of the country.

Anti-Elite, Pro-America

The two forces—rejection of the ruling class and the MAGA ethos—are often intertwined. Approximately 15% of comments blend both sentiments. This suggests for many, Trump’s appeal stems from being an outsider and the embodiment of pro-America ideals.

Supporters view Trump as an opponent of the “corrupt establishment” and a catalyst for a cultural and political renaissance centered around MAGA values

In the final stretch of campaigning, Harris’s campaign trail footprint is heavily focused on urban areas and issues. Democratic voters say rural and suburban areas are feeling overlooked. This urban focus drives a sentiment of disillusionment and skepticism among non-urban Democrats, who frequently feel disconnected from Harris’s platform.

I love that Kamala Harris is doing an event in Mercer County, PA! This is deep red territory. Donald Trump won it by 25 points. It’s all about the margins. If she can bring it down to 20 points and keep her margins in Philadelphia, she wins PA, and thus the White House! pic.twitter.com/jdR9Zd23gV

— Russell Drew (@RussOnPolitics) September 5, 2024

The Forgotten Democrat

MIG Reports data shows feelings of disenfranchisement, with up to 70% of Democratic comments in non-urban areas expressing negative sentiment toward Harris.

They use terms like "liar," "elite," and "out of touch" to describe her, saying she prioritizes the interests of urban elites over those of average Americans. Only about 10% of comments reflect positive sentiment. These highlight Harris’s potential for representation, though they’re greatly overshadowed by critiques.

Approximately 20% of comments contain a mix of approval and disappointment, indicating a nuanced struggle among some Democrats who appreciate her achievements but feel alienated by her focus on urban-centric issues.

• FEC data shows Democrats raised more than $1 billion, with the highest donations in coastal states with large urban populations.
• This is compared to Republicans raising $565 million in a wider scattering of geographical donations.

Nuanced Criticisms

Several anomalies add depth to these findings. Rural and suburban voters often critique Harris’s identity as a woman of color, associating her rise with elite endorsement rather than grassroots support, which they see as alienating. They reference her ascendence to the nomination with words like, "hand-picked" and "elite politics,” highlighting discomfort with her establishment involvement.

Language

Linguistic there is a prevalence of third-person language, even in supportive comments. This suggests a passive engagement that may indicate shallow connection to Harris’s campaign. Urban supporters often use first-person pronouns ("I" and "we") to voice optimism, reflecting personal identification with her campaign.

Conversely, rural and suburban critics lean toward third-person language ("they" and "them"), which reflects detachment and a sense of alienation. This split is pronounced, with around 60% of non-urban comments using third-person references, emphasizing the ostracization this group feels from the party.

The Economy

Non-urban Democratic voters often cite economic concerns such as inflation and taxation, criticizing Harris’s policies as insufficiently addressing their financial struggles. This economic critique is an anomaly, as Democratic support is generally strong for Harris on economic issues. Voters in middle America and rural and suburban communities say Harris’s policies do not address reality.

Messaging

The communication style of Harris’s campaign adds to these frustrations, with many non-urban Democrats finding her language divisive. They say it reinforces the urban-rural divide within the Democratic base.

Harris’s style has led to increased demands for unity and respectful dialogue. Ultimately, Harris’s urban-centric approach, combined with perceived elitism and divisive rhetoric, intensifies discontent among suburban and rural Democrats.

This sentiment presents a critical obstacle to broader Democratic support, suggesting Harris's ability may not be strong enough to unify the party’s diverse voter base.

The most recent topical conversations online about Trump and Harris continue to show top discussions around:

• Ideologies (culture issues)
• Economic Issues
• Housing
• Border Security
• Security Issues (national security)

While both candidates generate considerable engagement, Trump consistently garners a more favorable perception or, at the very least, a more engaged and vocal base across these topics.

Ideologies

In discussions about cultural issues, Trump has a definitive edge, resonating with voters who prioritize traditional American values. The tone of these conversations reflects a divide between conservative values and progressive policies.

Many view Trump as a defender of American cultural identity against radical changes by the progressive left. Harris supporters are frustrated with “extremism” in the MAGA movement, but this sentiment lacks the intensity seen in Trump’s base.

Trump supporters are energized, framing the ideological battle as one to “save America” from forces they deem un-American. This cultural intensity gives Trump an advantage, as his supporters rally. Harris’s support appears more tempered and defensive in tone.

Economic Issues

Many voters blame their financial struggles with Biden-Harris policies. They point to Trump’s previous term as a period of economic stability and growth. There's frustration with inflation, high gas prices, and a rising cost of living—all blamed on Biden and Harris.

The narrative frequently casts Trump as a solution to these economic woes. Supporters believe his leadership could restore financial stability. Harris defenders attempt to highlight economic improvements, but this narrative seems to lack resonance, especially in light of the recent jobs report.

Trump appears to be “winning” the economic argument. People view his policies as pro-growth and more aligned with middle-class concerns.

Housing

Millions of Americans are also frustrated over housing affordability and rising costs. In these discussions, Trump’s supporters emphasize that his leadership would prioritize Americans over migrants, whom they blame for driving up housing demand and costs.

There is a strong undercurrent of resentment in these conversations, with phrases like “putting Americans first” and “protecting the American dream” often surfacing in support of Trump.

Harris supporters say her proposals for affordable housing and assistance to first-time homebuyers are necessary steps. However, many point out that these programs would likely still benefit illegal immigrants over citizens.

Policy proposals from Harris generate skepticism. This underlying doubt among critics, combined with Trump’s appeal to prioritize Americans, tilts public sentiment toward Trump in the housing debate.

Border Security

Border security consistently shows criticism toward Harris. Americans attribute current immigration challenges to her “open borders” policies. The rhetoric in these discussions often includes references to safety concerns and economic impacts.

Many present Trump as a champion of a strong border and protecting American interests. Harris’s narrative, by contrast, struggles against negativity, with supporters defending her approach as more humane but failing to overcome fears and frustrations.

This intensity of criticism directed at Harris and the frequent calls for a return to Trump’s immigration policies indicate that Trump holds a commanding position on the topic of border security. This is particularly evident in Harris’s messaging, which increasingly echoes Trump’s.

Security Issues

National and foreign security issues are particularly contentious across party lines, with both candidates receiving mixed sentiment. However, Trump’s image as a strong, decisive leader gives him a perceived edge in the public eye. Trump supporters view his approach to foreign relations as promoting peace. People cite things like the Abraham Accords and his handling of adversarial countries as exemplifying his strength.

Harris supporters argue her stance on Ukraine and upholding alliances is necessary for maintaining global stability. However, there is also significant criticism that the Biden-Harris administration fosters global tensions.

Many typically progressive groups are divided on Harris—Particularly regarding Israel-Hamas conflicts. Trump endorsements from Arab Americans and Somali leaders signal some shifts in voter views of American foreign policy.

Many people are discussing the “gender gap” in this election with women largely leaning Harris and men leaning Trump. While many people understand that trends among men and women differ, it remains to be seen how these trends may sway the election results.

MIG Reports data confirms many trends driving male and female voters, their alignment with candidates, and generational trends influencing attitudes.

Male Support for Trump

Most men’s discussions of politics online are supportive of Trump. They say they’re drawn by his economic and national security policies. MIG Reports analysis reveals:

• 61.53% of male voters align with Trump, citing law and order and the economy. They view Trump as reinforcing traditional American values and ensuring stability.
• 38.47% of male voters support Harris, often citing dissatisfaction with Trump’s rhetoric rather than alignment with Harris’s policies.

Female Support for Harris

Female voters, especially those concerned with social equity and healthcare, favor Harris.

• 70.49% of female voters back Harris, praising abortion and gender equity. They see her as defending women’s autonomy and achieving social progress.
• 29.51% of female voters express support for Trump, often driven by economic concerns, which they feel outweigh social policies.

Men Dominate Online Discussions

Online data may not be completely representative as male voices dominate discussions.

• MIG Reports data shows 62.34% of online discussion is among men.
• This higher representation often skews discussions toward economic and national security themes, creating a narrative aligned with Trump’s platform.
• Only 37.66% of the discussions comes from women online.
• The gender disparity reflects broader trends where men dominate discourse on traditional political issues, while engaged women tend to be highly energetic.

Statistics show there are more women in American than men—168 million women versus 165.28 million men. This suggests the full spectrum of female viewpoints is likely not captured exclusively through online voter discussions.

Male Voter Priorities

In online discussions, men say they prioritize economic stability and national security.

Economic Stability

• Inflation, job creation, and taxes are top concerns.
• Many men align with Trump’s promise of fiscal conservatism and deregulation.
• They say Trump’s economic approach offers tangible stability, with sentiments focused on his track record of job creation and pro-business tax policies.

National Security and Immigration

• Male conversations voice anxiety about immigration policy and national security.
• Trump’s approach to border control resonates deeply, with men framing stricter immigration as essential to preserving American sovereignty.

Female Voter Priorities

Women mostly prioritize social equity, abortion, and healthcare.

Abortion and Healthcare

• Women discuss Harris’s pro-abortion platform with passion.
• Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, many women say their support for Harris reflects a desire to safeguard personal freedoms.
• However, MIG Reports data also shows a growing number of women are willing to prioritize public health and MAHA over abortion.

Social Equity and Climate Change

• Many women are drawn to Harris’s positions on climate change and environmental policy, seeing these as critical to family and future welfare.
• Women focus less on economic strength compared to men, saying they prefer policies that will address systemic inequities.

Younger Voters (Under 30)

• Younger voters, especially women, lean towards progressive issues.
• This age group prioritizes social justice, climate change, and abortion, with strong support for Harris.
• Younger men are more likely to voice anti-establishment sentiment, with economic anxieties often eclipsing party loyalty.
• However, many younger men resonate with Trump’s focus on economic growth as an antidote to inflation.

Middle-Aged Voters (30-50)

• Middle-aged men say economic stability and national security are motivating them, leading many in this group to support Trump.
• These men associate Trump with financial and familial security.
• Middle-aged women see Harris’s healthcare and family welfare policies as preferable.
• They value stability but view it through a lens of economic impact through social policies and feeling reassured rather than economic theory.

Older Voters (50+)

• Older men mostly lean toward Trump, seeing his policies as preserving national strength and security.
• Older women, while concerned with national stability, place a higher emphasis on healthcare access and social welfare policies.
• Many voice preference for Harris’s opposition to Trump and advocacy for progressive social values.

Gender-Based Issues and Voter Engagement

Based on MIG Reports analysis of voter discussions, women likely to show higher turnout at the polls. This is fueled by anger over Roe v. Wade and abortion discussions among Democrats.

Many women see the election as a direct defense of their personal freedoms. Female urgency is evident in passionate discussions around Kamala Harris, whom they see as a champion for these rights.

Men are also engaged strongly in political discussions but indicate a mix of motivations to vote. Issues like gun rights and immigration also tend to feature prominently in male discussions, overshadowing the more interpersonal issues highlighted by women.

Energy levels suggest women are slightly more energized compared to men. Female commenters express a profound commitment to change, speaking out against Trump and calling to resist authoritarianism.

Men often express support in more practical and less emotional terms. The disparate energy level in discourse could suggest turnout differences. However, this remains to be seen if men choose to vote, while remaining at a lower baseline for emotional intensity.

Campaign fervor is cresting just days prior to the election and MIG Reports data shows non-Trump partisans—liberals and Democrats—are leaning into performative outrage. Using dramatic language, hyperbolic expressions, and a repeated emphasis on extreme descriptors, this group is expressing high emotion.

Some do articulate reasonable concerns over some of Trump’s policies and potential influence. A substantial portion of liberals also seem to genuinely believe the outrage, calling Trump a fascist. However, much of the discourse skews toward performative expressions, crafted to amplify emotional resonance and foster a unified group identity.

Ana Kasparian clashes with Cenk Uygur on Trump, arguing that he isn't a “fascist” and the Democrat Party misrepresents him.

Follow: @AFpost pic.twitter.com/RPvzniKyge

— AF Post (@AFpost) November 1, 2024

Performative Elements in Language

The language deployed across these conversations frequently borders on theatrical.

• Terms such as “fascist,” “Hitler,” and “authoritarian” are common, imbuing Trump with a villainous aura that aligns with familiar tropes.
• Critics frame him as an antagonist in a moral and political struggle.
• Despite the existence of other authoritarian leaders like Pol Pot, Josef Stalin, Augusto Pinochet, Hitler is only parallel most use to depict Trump.
• The lexicon signals a collective identity that rallies around shared anxieties and moral judgments.
• Embellished phrases like “end of democracy” or “chaos in America,” tap into a performative mode designed less to analyze and more to evoke.
• The prevalence of these dramatized expressions suggests the intent is to stir reactions—likes, comments, and shares.

The tone of many online posts shows stylized indignation. Common keywords like “garbage,” “disgrace,” and “complete disaster” create an atmosphere that leans heavily on hyperbole to drive points home.

Much of the discourse can be categorized as “outrage posting,” where media and influencers exaggerate language to amplify emotional responses.

Outrage as a Mobilization Tool

The performative outrage often functions as a mobilization tool.

• Posts pushing extreme discontent or alarmist tones are among the most engaging, with metrics indicating hyperbolic statements significantly boost reactions.
• The performative nature serves as a rallying call, mobilizing users by constructing Trump as a political opponent and existential threat.
• Posts often use an urgent tone, calling for action or moral imperatives that encourage followers to align with the collective response.
• Recurring terms include, “protect democracy” or “save America,” tapping into a mythology of resistance and survival.

Heightened rhetoric on both sides shapes voter responses, promoting a sense of duty among followers. The performative outrage is often a coordinated effort to convert emotional reactions into tangible support for the broader progressive agenda.

🚨 Warning - heavy TDS: Before my flight, this woman put her middle finger up at me. I ignored it.

After the flight, she walked by me before I could record and screamed that I was a “facist”. Here is the rest of the interaction: #TDS #5days pic.twitter.com/ra5zAa2OCv

— Melissa Robey (@Robey2020) October 31, 2024

Genuine Concern vs. Amplified Rhetoric

Certain topics, such as healthcare, education, and climate change, are discussed with less sensationalism and more emphasis on practical consequences. The language shifts subtly to discuss policies or potential impacts, emphasizing marginalized groups and vulnerable communities.

Moments of sincerity suggest that while performative outrage dominates, there is a genuine core that fuels these discussions, reflecting real fears and apprehensions among progressives.

However, the performative aspect tends to overshadow genuine concerns due to rage bait engagement. This dynamic suggests the structure of social media itself, with its emphasis on engagement metrics, incentivizes users to use a hyperbolic style.

Outrage as the New Norm

Progressive conversations about Donald Trump are contentious and emotional. The use of exaggerated language, dramatized fears, and repeated calls to action suggest the discourse operates primarily to elicit reactions, reinforce group identity, and galvanize support. Genuine concerns do exist, particularly on specific policy issues, yet they are often subsumed within the larger spectacle of outrage.

Language analysis suggests discourse is disproportionately hyperbolic compared to real, normal life. However, it’s also possible to conclude that many anti-Trump voters who exhibit what some call “TDS” (Trump Derangement Syndrome), are genuinely disturbed. There are also growing discussions about mental health, anxiety, depression, and anger tied to political fears.

Reactions to Kamala Harris’s closing pitch in Washington, D.C. were tepid. There are significant obstacles for her, with criticism and skepticism largely overshadowing positive responses.

I am in Kamala Harris’s Ellipse rally crowd in D.C., and her whole crowd is angry pro-Hamas voters chanting “Intifada Revolution.” A Kamala victory means all these “lovely” people standing behind me will be coming to “protest” in your town. President Trump is the only one with… pic.twitter.com/xNg3Jl6ilb

— Charles R Downs (@TheCharlesDowns) October 29, 2024

Voter Sentiment

• Sentiment toward Harris’s closing pitch skews heavily negative, with approximately 70% of comments expressing critical perspectives on her message and policies.
• While some supportive voices resonate with her emphasis on democratic values, the dominant tone is critical.
• Primary criticisms focus on issues like immigration, corruption, and perceived leadership failings, and her lack of support for Palestine.

Independents

• Around 82-85% of Independents express skepticism or opposition to Harris’s messaging.
• Many Independents are frustrated with her approach to the border, seeing her policies as disconnected from their concerns.
• Americans perceive her as out of touch with citizen needs, viewing her focus on unity and democracy as insufficient to address immediate crises.
• Only 15-18% expressed support, typically referencing her work for marginalized communities, though this support was notably less intense than the criticisms.

Language Patterns

The language on social media is charged and polarized. Key negative phrases—such as “inept,” “failure,” and “delusional”—paint a picture of Harris as lacking the capacity to address critical issues.

Negative terms related to immigration and law enforcement, like “open borders” and “corrupt judges,” further intensify the critical narrative, as commenters often challenge her ability to lead on pressing national issues.

Supportive language, though less frequent, often contains “democracy,” “freedom,” and “hope,” portraying Harris as an advocate for marginalized groups. However, this positive language is overshadowed by the stronger negative critiques.

Independents

Language among Independents reflects heightened skepticism, often using vivid and direct critiques of Harris’s policies. Terms like “open borders” and “draining Social Security” capture the most common concerns.

The rhetoric suggests Independents view her priorities as misaligned, prioritizing illegal migrants over American citizens. Other terms like “defund the police” and “intifada” reveal an intense reaction to what they see as her radical policies. Many protesters, even in her own base, are furious about Harris’s support for Israel.

Just a few seconds in and Kamala's already getting drowned out by sirens. pic.twitter.com/Fype2ThqP2

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 29, 2024

Convincing Undecided Voters

Harris’s narrative, focused on unity and social justice, struggles to resonate with undecided voters. They voice distrust and anger in response to her closing message.

The dominant critique from undecided voters is the disconnect between her rhetoric and American priorities. They say her messaging lacks the substance needed to sway them. Keywords like “inefficiency” and “self-seeking” further emphasize a view of Harris as unable to address critical issues convincingly.

Critiques often emphasize Harris's lack of authenticity, with terms like “pandering” and “lip service” describing her message. Harris’s focus on unity falls flat in the wake of divisive rhetoric from Harris and, during her closing speech, from Joe Biden.

Shriveling Enthusiasm

Any enthusiasm generated by her closing pitch is modest and likely unable to counterbalance the significant opposition. Supporters rallying behind her message are literally drowned out by protests from angry Democratic voters and disillusioned Independents. Many Americans view her policies as radical and impractical.

Independents say her closing pitch leaves them feeling disconnected rather than energized. There is a sense of disenchantment rather than engagement. Harris’s efforts to invoke pride or urgency appear largely ineffective, particularly overshadowed by Joe Biden’s comments calling Trump supporters “garbage.