The 2024 election is looking more like an uphill battle for Vice President Harris. Several factors, ranging from poor handling of key issues like disaster response and immigration, to lackluster media appearances, to a perceived fracture among Democrats, are compounding her challenges. MIG Reports analysis suggests the downward trajectory indicates Harris’s chances diminishing in the last month of campaigning.

Growing Negativity on Key Issues

Kamala Harris's support has been eroding across several critical issues, including Hurricane Helene response, immigration, the economy, and even abortion.

MIG Reports data shows the top discussion topics regarding Kamala Harris in the last three days reveal declining approval. Natural disasters, abortion, hospitals, Israel, national security, and the economy all show Harris with net negative support. The only issues with a net positive movement on October 8 are Palestine, her presidential nomination, and housing.

Net Change in Support (Last Three Days)

• Natural Disasters: -10 points
• Abortion Rights: -5 points
• Hospitals: -4 points

These downward trends expose rising voter frustrations on critical issues. Americans are increasingly disillusioned with Harris's inability to handle issues they find important.

Hurricane Helene Debacle

Americans are frustrated and even enraged with the federal government’s response to Hurricane Helene, often blaming Harris directly. Online conversations show people believe federal aid was misallocated during recent disasters with massive spending for illegal immigrants and a pittance for hurricane victims.

Many feel the Biden-Harris administration focuses on international aid and support for illegal immigrants over disaster relief for citizens. This has been a particular sore spot for Republican and Independent voters who are increasingly skeptical of Harris’s competence to lead in crisis situations.

Immigration and Border Security

Harris’s role as "Border Czar" has done her no favors. Her policies on border security and unclear statements about future policies anger voters. Many routinely criticize Harris for being too lenient and facilitating a mass invasion in the last three years. The perception that her administration has failed to secure the border, while prioritizing foreign aid and migrant support, has created a significant credibility gap.

Biden Jumping Ship

Many voters are now inferring discord between Harris and Biden, further eroding her credibility even within the Democratic Party. Recent examples of Biden’s public remarks have fueled speculation that the two are not on the same page, which reinforces perceptions the Party is fractured at the top.

Disjointed Messaging Hurts Party Unity

• Voters point out Biden seeming to undermine Harris regarding hurricane preparedness in Florida, with Harris claiming Governor DeSantis refuses to engage with the administration and Biden stating they’re in personal contact.
• President Biden also recently overshadowed Harris by holding a press conference at the same time Harris was scheduled to go live on CNN.
• Many also say Biden is countering Harris’s messaging by reiterating her role in the administration, saying she’s “singing from the same song sheet,” including her in negative voter sentiment about the last three years.
• Voters are also discussing alleged animosity between Biden and Harris staffers in the White House, with allegations of a physical altercation occurring among staffers.

The confusion within the administration does not put voters at ease, causing speculations about disarray, Biden’s cognitive health, and hostility within the current administration. Many on the right joke about Biden recently wearing a Trump hat, saying he’s actively working against the Harris campaign.
Democrats, meanwhile, express anxiety about Party fracture, worrying whether it hurts Harris’s chances. This disjointed messaging may signal growing problems for the Harris campaign and the Democratic Party overall.

There is a rising fear among Democrats that negative press and infighting could suppress voter enthusiasm and turnout. For a Democratic base that is already skeptical of Harris’s leadership abilities, this division is only exacerbating concerns.

Republican and Independent Sentiment

Republicans and Independents seem to be more united behind Donald Trump. Many take every opportunity to drive home their view that Harris is unfit for office. MIG Reports data shows Harris continues to trail Trump in national approval.

Voter Sentiment

• Support for Donald Trump: 53%
• Support for Kamala Harris: 45%

The sustained support gap is significant, particularly with most polling showing a tight race. All discussion data shows voters are concerned about the economy and immigration—two issues on which Harris is weak. For Republicans, there is hope that Trump is growing stronger, though many still express concerns about election integrity.

Less than a month from the election, early voting discussions among Americans reveal strong emotional engagement and division. Through analysis of voter conversations, key patterns in language, motivations, and support for Trump and Harris emerge. Sentiments among those who have already voted or plan to vote early shed light on the reasons behind their choices and how they articulate their political motivations.

• Trump has stronger support on top issues except for abortion.
• His highest leads are in campaign rallies and foreign policy.

Voter Reactions

• Trump supporters emphasize economic concerns, patriotism, and frustration with Biden and Harris.
• Harris supporters focus on social justice, stability, and empathetic leadership.
• Language among Trump supporters is often combative and urgent, while Harris supporters talk about optimism and adherence to progressive values.
• Both groups express strong emotional investment, framing early voting as crucial to the outcome of the election.

Support for Donald Trump

Among early voters, most Trump supporters express dissatisfaction with Biden and Harris, particularly on the economy and foreign policy. There is a clear desire for a return to more stable and prosperous times they experienced under Trump’s presidency.

Voters use phrases like "Trump gets things done" and "America-first policies." They vocally call for a shift back to Trump’s leadership. Republican voters emphasize voting early as an act of urgency, motivated by a belief that America’s values and future are at stake.

Trump supporters highlight patriotism and preserving traditional American values as key reasons for casting ballots early. They emphasize the need to "take back our country" and view their vote as a defense against progressive threats posed by Harris and Walz.

There is also a strong sense of community on the right, with solidarity in phrases like "we are united" and "together we will win." This collective sentiment is underscored by shared distrust of the media and election integrity, with some mentioning concerns about voter fraud or manipulation. Many call for Republicans to turn out and make a Trump win “too big to rig.”

The language among Trump supporters is aggressive and emotionally charged. Words like "disgusting," "pathetic," and "traitors" are used in reference to Democrats, emphasizing voter frustration and investment in the election’s outcome. This rhetoric positions the election as a battle for the nation’s soul, with Trump as the protector of Americas core values.

Support for Kamala Harris

The Democratic base supporting Harris tends to focus on the future and progressive change. Early voters prioritize social justice, gun control, abortion, and DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion).

Early voters saying voting is a proactive step toward ensuring progress in the face of perceived stagnation or regression under Trump. Their language reflects a commitment to progressive ideals, with phrases like "we must move forward" and "progress for all."

Harris supporters want stability and steady leadership. They say after years of political upheaval, Harris can bring balance and restore faith in democratic institutions. They use phrases like "protect our democracy" and "steady leadership," illustrating a belief in Harris’s ability to handle the economy and social division.

Personal connection and empathy are key themes in Harris support narratives. Many view Harris as representing their values, often sharing personal stories about how her policies impact their lives and emotions.

The emotional tone among Democrats contrasts with the urgency of Trump supporters. Harris’s backers focus on moral responsibility and uniting within the Party, framing early voting as a duty to prevent Trump from threatening democracy.

Vice President Kamala Harris's appearance on the "Call Her Daddy" podcast generated controversy across the internet. Harris’s attempt to engage with a younger, more progressive audience drew sharp criticism from conservatives and moderates.

Some of the criticisms people mention are:

• Harris recording the podcast just days after Hurricane Helene, with recovery ongoing.
• The buffet of her signature word salads which provide little or no substance on issues.
• The objectionable nature of the podcast’s subject matter as a pillar interview of her campaign a month before the election.
• Her inaccurate and uninformed comments on abortion and bodily autonomy.

Harris on "Call Her Daddy"

The "Call Her Daddy" podcast has built its reputation as an irreverent space for discussions on relationships, sex, and social issues—far from the usual platform for a sitting vice president. Kamala’s decision to appear on this show suggests her clamor to reach younger voters. But the subject matter raised eyebrows among many political observers, especially older and more conservative voters.

The podcast’s trivial tone starkly contrasts with more serious policy debates typically expected of national leaders. While 62% of younger voters appreciated Kamala’s outreach and relatability, 67% of older and conservative voters criticized the podcast, seeing it as another instance of “word salad” responses that fail to address pressing issues.

Voter Reactions

Much of the discussion following Kamala’s appearance focused on her remarks about abortion. Specifically, Harris asserted there are no equivalent laws governing men’s bodies in the way she says abortion imposes on women’s.

Many listeners pointed out that neither Harris nor the podcast host mentioned the draft. Voters point out that men are subject to government regulation through conscription laws—though now some are advocating for “inclusivity” in the form of female conscription.

Call Her Daddy Girl: “Are there any laws that give the government control over a man’s body?”

Kamala Harris: “No”

The correct answer is the draft
pic.twitter.com/zEIUV9mMZN

— Ryan James Girdusky (@RyanGirdusky) October 6, 2024

MIG Reports data shows:

• 68% of pro-abortion voters support Kamala’s framing, emphasizing reproductive rights as an essential issue for women’s bodily autonomy.
• 75% of conservatives push back against Kamala’s claim, arguing the draft is a significant government imposition on men.
• 55% of swing voters find some merit in Kamala’s points but remain skeptical, with 45% calling her comments politically motivated.

Because Harris didn’t mention the draft, the public discourse made it a focal point, particularly as the segment was framed as attempting to think of an equivalent imposition on men. However, the messaging seems to work with younger progressive voters as 80% view Kamala’s commentary on bodily autonomy as progressive and necessary.

Young Voters vs. Older Voters

Kamala’s engagement with the "Call Her Daddy" audience was a clear attempt to connect with younger, progressive voters who value relatability and authenticity in political discourse. Among all younger voters, 62% react positively, praising Harris for stepping outside traditional political venues and making herself accessible to a new audience.

Older or more conservative voters react harshly, with 67% viewing the podcast as another example of Kamala’s inability to clearly articulate a coherent thought. These voters focus on her evasiveness on issues like inflation and immigration. Kamala's relaxed demeanor was seen not as refreshing, but as detached from the serious challenges facing the nation.

Kamala’s Challenge Moving Forward

Mixed reactions to Kamala’s podcast appearance underscore a fundamental challenge in her appeal to different voter blocs. Younger voters—especially those who are pro-abortion—see her as a relatable and progressive figure. The podcast appearance, while a calculated risk to broaden her appeal, may have done more to reinforce existing divisions than to unify disparate voter groups.

Many on the right also point out that Trump has been appearing on podcasts and doing alternative media interviews for months, which much larger audiences.

🚨RATIO ALERT🚨

DISLIKES on Kamala's recent cringe Call Her Daddy episode have officially eclipsed likes by a factor of TWO with only 100K views in one day

By contrast:

Trump commands REAL culture with appearances reaching tens of millions of views in mere HOURS

WINNING. pic.twitter.com/TPQbsduujq

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) October 7, 2024

In the run-up to the 2024 election, Kamala’s ability to bridge these divides will be critical. Her media strategy may help solidify support among progressives, but risks alienating many segments of the electorate. The perception that she dodges difficult questions with "word salad" responses remains a significant barrier to her.

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.

The vice-presidential debate on CBS between J.D. Vance and Tim Walz sparked partisan discussion, memes, and potentially moved certain voter sentiments. Even many Democrats and mainstream media outlets are declaring Vance the decisive victor.

One of the most discussed moments of the debate was Tim Walz’s inability to clearly explain his misrepresentation about being in China on the day of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989.

Worst moment of the night for Walz: stumbling through an explanation of why he lied about being in China during the Tiananmen Square massacre.

One of the most awkward debate moments of my lifetime. pic.twitter.com/L6NBRAIl3F

— Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) October 2, 2024

Vance’s Decisive Victory

Most voters and media figures agree that J.D. Vance outperformed Tim Walz during the debate. This includes Washington Post polling confirming swing state voters consider Vance the winner—14 to 8. Mainstream media figures like Geraldo Rivera, Jake Tapper, and Chris Cuomo all conceded Vance’s victory.

Media reactions after the JD Vance vs. Tim Walz debate.

Geraldo Rivera: JD Vance won the debate.

NBC: Does Tim Walz have a problem with the truth?

Chris Cuomo: JD Vance fact-checked the moderators and he was right.

CNN's John King: Vance carried the important issues.

CNN's… pic.twitter.com/5rICMSivUC

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 2, 2024

Vance's assertiveness and command over key issues like immigration, law and order, and the economy helped him establish a dominant presence on stage. His assertiveness without becoming combative or insulting appeals particularly to voters in swing states and conservatives who cringe at Trump’s bombastic style.

Post-Debate Sentiment

MIG Reports data shows:

• Vance’s support increased to 52% (+2)
• Walz’s support decreased to 48% (-2)

This uptick in Vance's favor post-debate indicates his performance not only solidified his base but may help sway some undecided and Independent voters. While Walz remained steady among his core supporters, the drop in his overall numbers shows a lack of confidence in his performance.

• National approval for Vance moved from 44% on Friday to 49% post-debate.
• Walz’s approval moved from 47% on Friday to 46% post-debate.
• Both candidates generated significant discussion volume jumping from less than 10,000 mentions on Friday to 78,122 of Walz post-debate and 91,624 of Vance.

Voter Sentiment Breakdown

Republican Base

Vance’s explicit loyalty to Donald Trump and his framing of issues like immigration played well with the GOP base. His confidence and casual but precise take-down of Walz and moderator questions created a surge of praise and memes. MAGA voters see Vance as a strong voice that will carry forward Trump-era policies.

Some conservatives, however, expressed displeasure with Vance’s abortion comments, voicing frustrations that he is too moderate on pro-life issues. Others, however, say Vance had Walz on his back foot regarding abortion—an issue Democrats tend to win.

Democratic Base

Walz’s focus on reproductive rights and healthcare continues to please the Democratic base. They appreciated his defense of progressive values and insistence on being pro-woman.

However, many Democrats understood that his demeanor was less confident, overwhelmed, and less impressive than Vance’s. Many pivoted away from Walz’s performance to suggest that VP debates and VP performance in general is less important than presidential conduct.

Independent Voters

As usual, Independents are divided. Some appreciated Vance’s confident and composed demeanor, but others were skeptical of his evasive responses. They particularly disliked his responses to questions about Trump and healthcare.

Still, Vance’s unflappable presence led to focus group, polling, and sentiment data showing most Americans conclude Vance won. Vance’s performance may also appeal to certain Independents looking for stability and leadership in uncertain times.

Key Issues During the Debate

Among the issues discussed at the debate, immigration and abortion stand out.

MIG Reports analysis shows:

• Sentiment toward Vance in the 24 hours post-debate reached 44% while Walz stood at 43%.
• Immigration sentiment was 43% for Vance and 44% for Walz.
• China sentiment was 48% for Vance and 43% for Walz.
• Sentiment on the economy was 46% for both candidates.

Immigration

Vance's portrayal of the current immigration system as chaotic and harmful to the American economy resonates deeply with voters concerned about border security. This issue is particularly salient in swing states like Arizona and Florida, where border policy is a top voter concern. However, many critics took issue with Vance firing back at moderators who attempted to fact check his statements about Haitian migrants in Ohio.

JD Vance refuses to accept the fake fact check and calls out the moderators on it so they shut his mic. Incredible pic.twitter.com/yuQ0QRfYsz

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) October 2, 2024

Election Integrity

Vance’s response on the legitimacy of the 2020 election results divided voters along partisan lines. While it cemented his standing with Trump’s base, most other voters disliked his discussion of the 2020 election and January 6. It raised concerns among swing voters and Independents about his commitment to democratic processes.

Abortion

Although abortion is a strong issue for Democrats, it was likely one of the most divisive topics during the debate. Vance appealed to some moderates with his softer language on abortion compared to strict pro-life advocates, angering some conservatives.

However, Vance also cornered Walz on the issue of late-term abortion when Walz failed to answer a direct question about the law he signed in Minnesota. This rare maneuver by a Republican led some to feel Walz lost ground for Democrats on their top issue.

FACT: Tim Walz signed a law that allowed babies to be left to die if they survive an abortion.

Babies who are BORN ALIVE. pic.twitter.com/brmlbohKtK

— Students for Life of America | Pro-Life Gen (@StudentsforLife) October 2, 2024

Climate Change

Democrats responded positively to Walz’s position on climate change but many on the right criticized the moderators for making a question about the devastation of Hurricane Helene about climate change.

While climate change was the topic of the second question in the debate, for voters, this issue remains secondary to economic and immigration concerns.

Election Impact

J.D. Vance's victory in the vice-presidential debate strengthens his position in the Republican party as a strong leader and effective communicator. His ability to maintain support from the GOP base while reaching out to Independents and undecideds may be important in swing states.

Meanwhile, Walz and Harris at the top of the Democratic ticket face the challenge of coming across as relatable and confident to voters. Many on both sides of the aisle agree that Vance won but couch their observation in uncertainty about how much the victory can impact the election amid many other major events like potential war in the Middle East, Hurricane Helene aftermath, the dock worker strike, and critical border issues.

Whistleblower allegations linking Minnesota Governor and Democratic VP nominee Tim Walz to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) are sparking online discussion. Voter reactions vary based on political affiliation, with strong opinions on both sides.

• Republicans view the allegations as confirmation of foreign influence on U.S. politics.
• Democrats largely dismiss them as politically motivated attacks.
• Independents express skepticism and curiosity, asking for transparency.

🚨BREAKING: Chairman Comer Is Subpoenaing DHS After Whistleblower Reveals Information on Governor Walz’s Ties to the CCP

According to recently received whistleblower disclosures, we’ve learned of a non-classified, Microsoft Teams group chat among DHS employees and additional… pic.twitter.com/VRuXBbf2dR

— Oversight Committee (@GOPoversight) September 30, 2024

Voter Reactions

MIG Reports analysis shows:

• Republicans: 70-85% view the allegations negatively
• Independents: 55-60% ambivalence, demanding transparency
• Democrats: 55-70% dismiss the claims as politically motivated
• 65-72% of all voters have concerns over foreign influence
• 60-65% of all voters distrust the media

Republicans

For Republicans, the whistleblower allegations heighten existing fears of foreign interference by China—and adversarial country. Roughly 70-85% of Republicans expressed strong negative sentiment, viewing this news as validating existing concerns that Democratic leaders are compromised.

Right leaning voters deeply distrust Walz, rallying behind calls for accountability and continued investigation. Many also hope these revelations will mobilize voters who care about national security and sovereignty.

Independents

Independent voters have varied responses, with 55-60% expressing ambivalence. They are curious and concerned but hesitate to accept the allegations at face value. Their reactions underscored the need for transparency and thorough investigation.

Many are frustrated with political sensationalism and worried increasingly scandalous claims with no significant resolution or clear evidence, could undermine serious political dialogue.

Democrats

Democratic voters largely reject the whistleblower allegations, with 55-70% dismissing them as politically motivated attacks. Many view the allegations as an attempt to discredit a prominent Democratic leader ahead of the 2024 election.

Many are skeptical about the validity of whistleblower claims, framing them as part of a broader effort to destabilize their party and divert attention from critical issues like healthcare and the economy.

Broader Public Concerns

In general, Americans have significant political and societal anxieties. Around 65-72% of voters say they’re concerned over potential CCP influence in U.S. politics and looming war. This concern transcended partisan lines, highlighting widespread fears about foreign policy and influence.

Additionally, 60-65% say they distrust media coverage, with both sides of the political spectrum criticizing the way the allegations are being reported. Especially among Republicans, there is criticism toward CBS for failing to mention the allegations during the Vice Presidential Debate.

Many Americans turn to alternative media sources like X, believing mainstream outlets either downplay or sensationalize the story.

Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) recently published report revealing hundreds of thousands of criminals have illegally entered the country. The report said, “as of July 21, 2024, nearly 650,000 criminal illegal aliens were currently on ICE’s Non-Detained Docket (NDD) and roaming free in communities throughout the United States.”

MIG Reports analysis shows this story specifically eliciting anger from all voters, but especially Independents. This analysis examines voter discussions, including surface-level reactions and the deeper meaning underlying sentiment.

BREAKING: In a stunning letter sent to @RepTonyGonzales by ICE, the agency reveals there are currently 13,000+ noncitizens convicted of homicide & 15,000+ noncitizens convicted of sexual assault who are roaming the US as part of ICE’s non-detained docket.https://t.co/KgS5DAWzV9

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) September 27, 2024

Border Security Conversations

Discussions about border security are dominated by concerns over public safety. Independents are particularly critical of the Biden-Harris administration for its immigration policies.

• 61% express disappointment in the administration's border leniency.
• 55% support Trump’s stricter border policies, reflecting a belief that his approach was more effective at safeguarding national integrity.
• 30% have mixed sentiment, indicating dissatisfaction with both major parties.

The use of third-person language in these discussions displays collective outrage toward Biden and Harris, distancing the commenters from personal accountability and broadly critiquing political failures.

Immigration Conversations

When discussing immigration more broadly, Independents voice mixed opinions.

• 70% have negative views of the Biden-Harris administration, critiquing its leniency and failure to manage vast migrant surges.
• 40% are optimistic toward Trump’s potential return to office.
• 30% are concerned about how immigration is framed, focusing on treating migrants humanely, and questioning the validity of rampant criminality.

Citizen and community safety is a critical concern for Independents, though some want more comprehensive, humane immigration reform.

Deeper Meaning Analysis

Beyond direct conversations, larger themes emerge. Most Independents express disillusionment with the current political leadership. Particularly in relation to border security, but also in broader governance.

• 30% of Independents express hope for a third-party candidate, indicating growing dissatisfaction with both Democrats and Republicans.

They consistently use both first- and third-person language, showing a divide between personal stakes and collective critiques. This suggests Independents are politically disengaged as well as frustrated with a lack of effective solutions. This discontent could signal a shift in voter mobilization, with many expressing a desire for accountability and stronger leadership.

Urgency in Reactions

A strong sense of urgency underpins many conversations. Many present the upcoming election as critical, emphasizing decisions on immigration and border security must be made now to prevent further chaos. Some comments describe voting as a life-or-death decision, stressing immediate action as necessary to secure the nation. This heightened urgency appears to drive a belief that leadership—particularly Trump’s—is necessary to restore order and protect national interests. This signals an energized and mobilized electorate, which includes many Independents.

Vice President Kamala Harris visited the southern border, reigniting a long-standing debate about her role as "border czar" and Biden-Harris immigration policies. Arriving just weeks before the 2024 election, Harris's appearance in Arizona drew widespread criticism. Many reactions included some version of the sentiment too little, too late.

MOLLIE HEMINGWAY: “This border trip today happened at the WORST possible time for [Kamala], given the other news that came out — that her administration allowed nearly half a MILLION criminals, MANY of them violent criminals — to just be in the country and roaming FREELY.” pic.twitter.com/6Q8QIRcxuy

— Proud Elephant 🇺🇸🦅 (@ProudElephantUS) September 27, 2024

Photo Op at the Border

MIG Reports data shows:

• 76% of voters perceive her visit as politically motivated and a "last-ditch effort" to appeal to voters who are increasingly angry.

Harris's border visit just weeks before the election raises red flags for many. After spending nearly four years avoiding the border as “border czar,” many view the untimely visit as empty and politically motivated.

Most Americans view the trip to Douglas, AZ, as clearly designed to pander for votes over an issue the Harris campaign is losing on. The timing makes the visit appear even more performative as a photo op than a sincere attempt to fix an issue which Harris has failed to address for years.

Kamala Harris was on the border for less than 20 minutes yesterday.

It wasn’t a border visit, it was a poorly ran photo opportunity. pic.twitter.com/rGVVkucswq

— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) September 28, 2024

For many, Harris’s visit is both suspiciously timed and a slap in the face to millions of Americans who have been outraged about the Biden-Harris administration’s refusal to address citizen concerns and protect the country.

• Following her border visit, national sentiment toward Harris regarding the border moved very little, increasing from 39% the day before to 42% the day after.
• However, in Arizona, Harris’s sentiment was more significantly impacted, dropping from 49% a week ago to 33% today.
• Harris’s overall sentiment in Arizona dropped from 44% a week ago to 42% today.

A Record of Neglect and Failure

MIG Reports data shows:

• 67% of voters distrust Harris’s motivations and approach to border security.

Disbelief about the sincerity of Harris’s overtures at the border springs from outrage at her track record—or lack thereof—on border security. Since taking office in 2021, Harris has been truant in her task of managing immigration and the border. Illegal crossings have been at all-time highs in the last several years.

Recent reports from ICE reveal the Biden-Harris administration has overseen 13,099 murderers and 15,811 rapists within a larger 425,431 convicted criminals entering the U.S. illegally.

🚨🚨BREAKING: According to a new report from the Deputy Director of ICE, Joe Biden and Border Czar Kamala Harris allowed a SHOCKING number of criminals into America, including:

- 13,099 Murderers
- 15,811 Rapists
- 425,431 Convicted Criminals

Treason. Disqualifying. Evil. pic.twitter.com/XG1oClyDNe

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) September 27, 2024

One of the most recurring accusations voters make against the Biden-Harris administration is the rollback of "Remain in Mexico" and other stringent Trump-era immigration policies. Among border communities, conservatives, moderates, and some Democrats is the belief that Harris intentionally left the border wide open, allowing dangerous criminals to enter. Voters see Harris’s policies as fostering lawlessness, further eroding confidence in the Democratic Party’s ability to manage immigration.

Cartel Trafficking, Rising Crime, and Safety

Voters often mention the tangible impacts Harris’s policies have had on crime rates, both along the border and within American communities. People criticize sharp increases in migrant crime and the fentanyl and larger drug crisis perpetuated by Mexican cartels under the Biden-Harris administration.

• 67% of voters link rising crime rates directly to Harris’s border policies.
• 77% favor stricter border policies and support reinstating Trump-era policies.
• 60% express preference for Donald Trump’s leadership on immigration.

In areas hardest hit by illegal immigration, voters are increasingly vocal about the lack of accountability and action from Washington. Many feel abandoned, left to deal with the fallout from policies that seem more focused on humanitarian optics than protecting American citizens.

Media Complicity in Border Gaslighting

Negativity about the Biden-Harris border is compounded by voter frustration toward media coverage. Many voters believe mainstream media willfully refuses to report the severity of the border crisis—particularly when it comes to crime statistics and cartel activity.

• 68% of voters accuse the media of underreporting or downplaying the immigration crisis.

Americans view the media as complicit in shaping a narrative favorable to the administration. Many voters choose alternative news sources for information on platforms like X, knowing the media will not report the reality of the situation.

What Does This Mean for the 2024 Election?

Sentiment about border security and the number of illegal immigrants flooding American communities is likely to play a pivotal role in the presidential election. Harris’s track record on the border is both a black mark on her vice-presidential record and a major liability for the Democratic Party.

If voters continue to feel highly motivated by border issues, it will likely play a role in deciding votes in November. Trump’s focus on law and order and his track record of reducing illegal crossings will likely resonate with voters who feel betrayed by Harris and her lax policies. Harris’s border visit rings insincere to many, coming too late to reverse the tide of public opinion.