In the U.S. presidential election, candidates vie for 538 electoral votes. Each state is allocated electors based on its congressional representation. To win, a candidate needs at least 270 electoral votes. Most states award all their electoral votes to the popular vote winner, except for Maine and Nebraska. Understanding this threshold is key to grasping the path to the presidency.
National Popular Vote
We determine support scores using a combination of discussion volume and approval toward each candidate in online conversations curated by our AI technology. With data from every state, we're able to determine national popular sentiment as accurately as traditional polling
Swing State Support Average
Donald Trump
Support Index: 00
Kamala Harris
Support Index: 00
Jill Stein
Support Index: 00
Real-Time Popular Vote
We determine the popular vote using a combination of metrics toward each candidate in online conversations we collect with our AI technology that updates in real-time. With the massive amount of data we collect, we're able to determine the popular vote as accurately as traditional polling, nationally or by state.
Donald Trump
Kamala Harris
Jill Stein
Key Metrics Trends
Donald Trump
Last 24 Hours
Kamala Harris
Last 24 Hours
Jill Stein
Last 24 Hours
Mentions: The number of social media comments the candidate appears in.
Sentiment: The trend of sentiment in the mentions.
Supporters: The change in the total number of supporters identified online
Articles
The October 2024 jobs report only inflames concerns about the economy as a central election issue. The report, which revealed only 12,000 jobs added, fell drastically short of the 100,000 expected. This also comes after multiple reports were revised down, including nearly one million from April last year to March of this year.
The biggest story of the week was the jobs report:
October: 12k new jobs when 100k expected. Job growth negative if govt excluded.
Many also point out that what little growth there is, comes from government job growth and foreign-born worker growth. The impact of immigration on employment continues to anger Americans who struggle every day to pay their bills.
The current economic situation places job growth and employment policies at the forefront of the electoral landscape. As job data continues to underperform, voters want leadership that will practically improve their lives.
Given strong disapproval among Independents and center-right voters, the jobs report likely pushes people vote for Trump. Many who are in essential swing states appear ready to shift support away from Harris and pull the lever for Republicans.
Swing Voters and Independents: Approximately 60% of swing voters are voicing frustration with the administration’s job creation record.
Calls for a Change: A majority of Americans say the country is heading in the wrong direction. They want private-sector-driven policies over government expansion.
MIG Reports Data: When the Oct. jobs report was released, discussion volume spiked while sentiment dropped from 46% to 40%.
Disillusionment with Job Growth
October’s weak job creation figure of 12,000—a substantial drop from expectations—causes anger and disappointment. Compounding the issue, job data for previous months is consistently revised downward, with September's jobs adjusted from 254,000 to 223,000 and August’s from 159,000 to 78,000.
These ever-weakening numbers drive deflated emotions about the economy under Biden-Harris, where “Bidenomics” is often cited as to blame.
Top Discussion Points
Dismal Numbers: Only 12,000 new jobs were created in October, marking the lowest monthly growth since 2020.
Private Sector Decline: Excluding government jobs, job growth was negative, intensifying frustrations at the Democratic focus on expanding public sector roles.
Manufacturing Losses: October saw a loss of 46,000 manufacturing jobs, a statistic voters interpret as a sign of economic decline rather than growth.
Voters widely view these trends as indicative of a stalled economy, with many drawing contrasts to the “Trump boom” years. They say job creation was stronger and more favorably distributed across private sectors.
Many also complain that, even when they have work and increasing pay, their quality of life is decreasing because of inflation. This disappointment and desperation are driving people to decry the last four years—a point which the Harris campaign is forced to embrace.
Americans are particularly angry about the makeup of job growth. Government employment overwhelmingly accounts for the pitiable growth numbers, which many see as unsustainable and “non-productive.” Voters say expanding government jobs does not stimulate the economy or boost GDP, which they view as the true engine of economic resilience.
The contrast in campaign platforms also becomes stark as Harris’s flagship economic contribution is more government workers while Trump has promised to appoint Elon Musk to decimate government bloat in a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Who else thinks Elon Musk should cut 80% of the Government Jobs when Trump is Elected ? pic.twitter.com/Kcyi9t97fk
— Marjorie Taylor Greene Press Release (Parody) (@MTGrepp) October 19, 2024
Top Discussion Points
Government Dependence: Most new jobs are government, a fact voters feel props up employment numbers without improving economic conditions.
Private Sector Struggles: With manufacturing and other private industries shedding jobs, voters feel job creation is artificial, lacking the dynamism required for sustainable growth.
For many, this trend signals an economy increasingly dependent on government intervention. Voters worry continuing in this direction will stifle private sector vitality and limit opportunities for recovery, ultimately worsening quality of life.
Immigration and Job Competition
The issue of immigration adds to voter ire. More and more voters believe lack of border control contributes directly to job disadvantages for American citizens. They say prioritizing employment opportunities for American-born workers should be a top focus, rather than policies that increase labor market competition.
Top Discussion Points
Foreign-Born Workers: Many of the jobs added have gone to foreign-born workers, resulting in a net loss for American-born workers.
American First: There is a strong sentiment that labor efforts should focus on hiring American citizens first to stabilize the job market for citizens.
Americans increasingly see poor border policies as a job competition issue but also emblematic widespread economic mismanagement. As the workforce grows through immigration, many worry American workers will bear the brunt of stagnant job growth.
Ideological and Political Reactions
Despite the dismal economic signals brought on by the Biden-Harris administration, there are still clear partisan divides. For conservatives, Democratic policies are synonymous with heavy-handed government control, tax hikes, and regulatory expansion.
Voters who lean right overwhelmingly see the solution as returning to the economic policies of the Trump era. They want American worker jobs, tax cuts, deregulation, and reduced reliance on government roles. Many also support Trump’s tariffs plan.
Top Discussion Points
Free-Market Advocacy: Americans want private-sector job creation through deregulation and minimal government intervention.
Economy Concerns: Fears about inflation, increased taxes, and a lack of opportunities have driven some Democrats and Independents toward Trump.
Disillusionment is not confined to conservatives and MAGA voters. Traditional Democratic voters and many Independents are voicing dissatisfaction. Concerns over Harris’s role in worsening inflation, combined with poor job reports, lead some former Democratic supporters to reconsider their loyalties.
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
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.
Prior to Sean “P Diddy” Combs’s arrest, "Nice try, Diddy" began as a humorous meme used to mock him for his relentless self-promotion and involvement in multiple projects. People spammed the phrase in the comments of unrelated posts and ads as a way to sarcastically suggest he was behind everything.
However, after Diddy is facing serious allegations, including sex trafficking, the phrase took on a darker, more critical tone. It now reflects public skepticism and disdain, particularly toward his attempts to maintain a positive public image. Now, people use the phrase to imply a sarcastic disbelief in his sincerity.
MIG Reports analysis shows the phrase “Nice try Diddy” has evolved as a focal point in cultural and political commentary. It symbolizes the public’s sharpened skepticism toward high-profile figures for nefarious, behind-the-curtain acts.
This seemingly lighthearted meme conveys a barbed critique of Diddy’s alleged crimes, contradictions, or hypocrisy. The phrase signals shifting cultural patterns around authenticity, the complex role of celebrity activism, and polarized views among average Americans.
Omg. The woman who was standing by and watching Diddy blackmail and sexually assault men, women and children is now weeping begging you to vote for Kamala Harris. pic.twitter.com/FZYhpjOEJr
Posts using “Nice try Diddy” convey a powerful skepticism toward establishment and elite figures. It questions their intentions, especially when actions do not match their professed beliefs.
For instance, when celebrities who advocate for social change simultaneously flaunt luxurious lifestyles or engage in contentious politics, audiences often respond with this phrase as a callout of perceived hypocrisy.
This pattern speaks to a cultural climate in which authenticity is increasingly prized. After Diddy’s recent arrest, skepticism toward his actions and potential crimes transform the phrase into a more serious critique, conveying deep distrust and disgust.
Contradictions in Celebrity Activism
"Nice try, Diddy” also reveals the contradictions in celebrity activism, where persona and identity is synonymous with wealth and luxury. When public personalities delve into political or social commentary, especially on issues like inequality or social justice, “Nice try Diddy” becomes a pointed response to hypocrisy.
Diddy's arrest, combined with the ongoing historical lack of transparency on Jeffrey Epstein's client list, the dissonance resonates more deeply. Many Americans question the chances of justice for elites involved in heinous crimes as none seem to face proportional consequences.
Distrust of Political Elites
Discourse around “Nice try Diddy” extends beyond celebrity culture into political polarization, especially regarding figures like Kamala Harris. Supporters and detractors alike use similar expressions to bolster their narratives, framing opposing viewpoints as out-of-touch or disingenuous.
This polarization reinforces political identities, creating a landscape where opposing ideas often seem trivialized, further widening divides. The added layer of Diddy’s recent controversies amplifies the meme’s resonance in polarized circles. The phrase indicates skepticism is growing toward political and cultural elites.
Indicative Cultural and Political Forces
“Nice try Diddy” echoes cultural critiques around the role of celebrities in politics, amplifying widespread frustration with disingenuous narratives from establishment elites.
This discontent fuels a demand for authentic leadership, causing people to rally around candidates and influencers they see as more relatable or “real.” People call for congruence between rhetoric and action, amplified by high-profile figures facing legal and moral scrutiny.
This reinforces the anti-establishment sentiments sweeping through contemporary discourse, which is often manifested in memes and ironic online endeavors.
“Nice try, Diddy” echoes older memes like “Epstein didn’t kill himself,” resonating with public skepticism toward elites protecting themselves. While Diddy is certainly a cultural force, his association with the political class also erodes any significant grasp as a cultural influence.
Overall, “Nice try Diddy” reflects a growing political groundswell where authenticity is non-negotiable, and public accountability extends beyond elected officials to include influential cultural figures.
With his recent allegations casting a long shadow, this phrase underscores a societal shift toward decentralizing authority and demanding accountability and transparency from establishment elites.