The Israel, Iran, Ukraine, and Russia conflicts are wearing on the American people. There is now a shift in landscape of voter sentiment regarding these foreign issues. Even those who consistently support U.S. involvement in international conflicts are now expressing frustration our government prioritizing foreign aid over domestic needs.
While a minority still advocates for aggressive military responses, particularly in defense of Israel and as a deterrent to Iran, the emerging consensus is that America’s resources should be used on domestic priorities like inflation, disaster recovery, and the welfare of citizens.
42% of voters support military action
40% oppose foreign aid
18% criticize ongoing foreign conflict
Financial Burden
A recurring theme in voter discussions is dissatisfaction with the billions of dollars streaming into foreign countries like Ukraine. Americans view this as a prime example of how U.S. leadership, particularly the Biden administration, prioritizes other countries over Americans.
Some compare $24 billion allocated to Ukraine with the pitiful financial relief provided to Hurricane Helene victims at home, voicing frustration. Citizens decry high inflation, gas prices, and insufficient FEMA aid, questioning the rationale for continued military support abroad.
Economic concerns fuel much of the opposition to foreign aid and military engagement. People see a disconnect between the billions sent abroad and the financial hardships Americans face. Voters want U.S. military and financial resources to be used for domestic issues like inflation, unemployment, and disaster relief.
Americans say funding conflicts in Ukraine, Israel, or elsewhere is a betrayal of American taxpayers. The phrase “America First” resonates strongly in these discussions, emphasizing a desire for the government to refocus its priorities on the welfare of its own citizens.
Not My Monkeys, Not My Circus
Public sentiment around Israel also reveals deep divides. While there is still significant support for Israel's right to defend itself against threats from Iranian proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas, this pro-military stance is shrinking.
Many advocates view Israel’s aggressive military tactics as necessary self-defense, especially in the face of recent missile strikes from Iran. However, the conversation now criticizes U.S. military aid to Israel, calling out the humanitarian crises in Gaza and Lebanon, and questioning whether these actions truly align with American interests.
Views or Iran are similarly divided. Some say a growing military presence and missile strikes against Israel is justification for a more aggressive U.S. response. Others call for diplomacy and caution.
Pro-military action views say the Biden administration’s softer approach emboldens Iran, escalating tensions. They say the Trump administration’s stringent sanctions would have prevented these dangers.
However, many are voicing opposition to further involvement in the Middle East. People perceive U.S. involvement as expensive with little benefit to the average American.
America FIRST
Overall, Americans indicate desire for a shift towards prioritizing domestic economic stability over foreign engagements. The pro-war perspective, once dominant, is now being overshadowed by calls for the U.S. to address its own challenges before intervening overseas.
This sentiment reflects a growing awareness that America’s long-term stability may be in jeopardy. Voters want to do everything possible to secure their own futures before extending support abroad.
MIG Reports analysis of Donald Trump’s conviction in New York City shows a continued negative reaction through the weekend. Fury is largely influenced by conservative and less progressive demographics expressing dissatisfaction with the trial and beliefs the process was unjust and politically motivated.
Discussion Trends
A lot of the conversation is highly partisan with right leaning comments often criticizing liberals, the court, and other institutions involved in the decision.
Some voters believe the unjust Trump conviction is a step towards communism and an attack on conservative values.
There is a palpable sentiment of deep division within the country, often illustrated through derogatory language, and a complete disconnect in the interpretation of events by both sides of the aisle.
Sentiment Trends
One clear trend a sense of disappointment and dissatisfaction with both the Democratic Party and the Biden administration. This is expressed through repeated criticism and anger towards Biden, expressions of disagreement with his policies, and criticism of his administration’s political maneuvers and lawfare. Many show support for a Trump comeback and tend to downplay or dismiss his legal issues.
Liberals and progressives express a more disjointed sentiment. Some celebrate the conviction as a win for democracy and justice, while others raise issues about social divisiveness stemming from political polarization. Far left and progressive voters sometimes express dissatisfaction about perceived insufficiency or inadequacy of systemic changes the conviction may bring.
Accusations Against the Uniparty
Conversations frame Trump's conviction as perpetrated by a system run by a corrupt bipartisan "uniparty." Many believe the uniparty or the deep state aims to consolidate power—and most view the Republican party as complicit.
Most discussion comes from Trump supporters who view him as fighting against this corrupt establishment. The verdict reinforces support for him and decreases sentiment towards Biden due to his perceived association with the uniparty.
Rule of Law
The largest volume of conversation refers to Trump's conviction being a result of political bias and legal system misuse.
Most voters express dissatisfaction with Democrats and Biden, while a minority support the conviction. They view the entire trial as a breakdown of the rule of law.
Those who approve of the verdict view it as justified and mostly support the current administration. Notably there seems to be very little middle ground on this issue, with most voters either strongly in favor or strongly opposed.
Some sub-groups believe Republicans are undermining the constitution and rule of law, increasing support for Biden and decreasing support for the GOP.
As a result of disillusionment and distrust of the system, there is discontent with politicians like House Speaker Mike Johnson and Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg for their perceived bias and corruption.
Deep State
Conversations about Trump's potential conviction are emotionally charged and polarized, often reflecting selective viewpoints, depending on the echo chamber.
Trump supporters discuss corruption involving the "deep state," Democrats, and CIA, expressing dissatisfaction and viewing the conviction as unjust.
Trump critics see the potential conviction as a form of justice, feeling satisfaction at his possible downfall. This may also suggest motives are skewed away from solely seeking justice but influenced by a partisan outlook.
Kicking off the 2024 Republican National Convention, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance was selected as Trump's Vice-Presidential pick. The announcement, made via Trump’s Truth Social platform, has polarized opinions, highlighting various factions within the GOP.
Reactions from the MAGA Base
Among Trump's staunch supporters, the response is largely positive. Many celebrate Vance as a fresh face who embodies the working-class struggles that Trump frequently highlights. Admiration stems from Vance’s transformation from a Never Trump critic to a MAGA advocate.
This segment perceives Vance as a potential successor for Trump’s populist agenda. They also say choosing Vance is a strategic move to secure the Rust Belt states, vital for the 2024 election. His background, including military service and authoring "Hillbilly Elegy," is seen as appealing to blue-collar voters and enhancing Trump's image as a champion of forgotten Americans.
Opposition and Skepticism Within and Beyond the GOP
Skepticism abounds within segments of the GOP and among Independents and Democrats. Critics from within the Republican Party highlight Vance’s previous harsh critiques of Trump, with some labeling him a flip-flopper driven by opportunism rather than genuine conviction.
Those who are wary of Vance often align with "Never Trump" Republicans who view the choice as pandering to Trump’s loyalist base rather than a unifying strategy for the broader party. The concern is that Vance will do little to attract moderate and Independent voters who are critical to winning the general election.
Concerns Over Voter Impact
Analysts and pundits express varying perspectives on how Vance’s candidacy might affect voter turnout. Some argue his selection will invigorate Trump’s base, solidifying support among core MAGA followers. Others contend that Vance lacks the broader appeal necessary to sway undecided voters or pull votes from the Democratic ticket.
Discussions also focus on whether Vance’s past as a Never Trumper might erode trust among unwavering MAGA supporters or if his new alignment with MAGA policies can mend those sentiments.
Sentiment Patterns and Discussion Trends
The overall sentiment trends suggest a polarized reaction. Loyal Trump supporters largely express approval, emphasizing Vance’s alignment with Trump’s policies and his perceived ability to carry on the MAGA legacy. Discussions often revolve around themes of loyalty, transformation, and Vance's potential to attract working-class voters.
On the other hand, detractors focus on his history of criticism against Trump. These sentiments are also echoed by moderate Republicans and Independents who doubt Vance's ability to appeal to a broader electorate. Critics voice concerns that Trump missed an opportunity for a more strategically beneficial choice, such as a candidate who might appeal to suburban women or minority voters.
Patterns Within GOP Factions
Vance’s selection has illuminated rifts within the Republican Party. Trump loyalists celebrate the move as a reinforcement of their influence within the party. However, establishment Republicans and those with a more traditional conservative outlook express reservations, underscoring a preference for a candidate who might bridge the divide between Trump’s base and centrists.
Online discourse about AI and American jobs continues to show worry. There is an overall negative sentiment, specifically among 50- to 60-year-olds and those in blue-collar positions.
Recent economic studies indicate negative sentiment is likely to continue as workers fear AI displacement in the workforce. This will likely extend beyond the cited demographics as more people consider the implications of AI on jobs. Several industries beyond blue-collar are feeling AI’s impact on the workforce.
The automotive sector led in job cuts, with Tesla slashing 14,000 jobs. This adds to a total of 14,373 for the month and 20,189 for the year, a 108% increase from last year.
Education jobs followed with 8,092 cuts in April, totaling 17,892 for the year. This is up 635% from the previous year due to budgetary constraints and recruitment issues.
The Healthcare industry saw 5,826 job cuts in April, totaling 17,218 for the year, a 41% decrease from last year.
Technology jobs saw 47,436 cuts this year, which is a startling 58% decrease from last year.
The media industry reported 8,091 cuts this year, down 29%. However, the news subset is up 12% at 2,184 cuts.
While not all job cuts were directly a result of AI innovations, many view AI as one more threat among many for jobs. People worry about the economy and other factors, which worsen fears that companies may opt to save money with automation.
American Fears About AI Displacement
There is a sense of inevitability and concern in most discussions about job cuts and AI. People are apprehensive about the rapid pace of artificial intelligence development and its potential to automate jobs that were previously considered secure. This includes jobs requiring higher education or specialized training.
Conversations often reflect concerns about technological unemployment, with some expressing anxiety about being forced into early retirement before they have had a chance to secure financial stability.
Sentiment Trends
Feelings about AI’s impact on employment trends are largely negative. Many Americans worry that AI and automation could push them out of the labor market prematurely. This would damage their ability to save adequately for retirement.
Displacement anxieties are especially noticeable among middle-aged workers who feel they are too young to retire but too old to re-enter the job market if displaced. These discussions frequently underscore the lack of adequate retraining and reskilling opportunities, which exacerbates fears.
Demographic Patterns
Some demographic patterns are also evident in these discussions. Older workers, particularly those in their 50s and early 60s, are more vocal about their concerns, specifically regarding AI.
Older workers often highlight the difficulty in finding new employment at a later stage in their careers. They also mention the inadequacy of their retirement savings in the face of unexpected job loss.
Younger demographics seem to express a different kind of concern. Their focus is more on long-term job security and the career disruptions AI might cause. Many younger workers are optimistic about their ability to adapt to new working conditions. However, they are still somewhat anxious, especially amid larger economic worries.
Geographically, workers in regions with a higher concentration of manufacturing and traditionally blue-collar jobs express more anxiety. Discussions in more tech-centric regions might reflect a more balanced or even optimistic view, with some anticipating that new job categories will emerge as AI technology evolves.
Withing the negative discussion, there also exists a minority viewpoint that sees AI as an opportunity rather than a threat. This group usually consists of those who work in tech or have seen the benefits of AI integration in the workplace. They argue AI could enhance productivity, create new job opportunities, and improve work-life balance.
Online discussions about the quality of modern films compared to past decades generate disdain fueled by nostalgia, cultural decay, and evolving industry standards. From emotional recollections of classics to admiration for contemporary storytelling diversity, American audiences remain divided but largely not entertained nor inspired.
Modern films prioritize current societal narratives over authentic storytelling.
Technology risks sidelining storytelling and removing human connection.
I need to be as clear & concise as humanly possible: #RedOne (🌟) is not just the single worst movie of 2024, it’s one of the worst movies I’ve seen in my life. Do not waste even half a second of your day on this movie- please. I beg you. I understand the responsibility that… pic.twitter.com/zNwG9xek8h
Nostalgia is a potent driver of sentiment, as many view films from the 1980s and 1990s as pinnacles of American culture and emotional resonance. This emotional anchor often skews opinions against contemporary offerings. Many view past favorites as ensconced in a "golden era" of filmmaking. People say, back then, movies were an art form but now Hollywood is just a factory churning out low-quality content.
Quality Versus Quantity
The industry's current output underwhelms viewers who lament a decline in narrative depth replaced by formulaic productions. While modern technology allows for prolific filmmaking, audiences struggle to find authenticity in a sea of commercialized content. Many people lament franchises, sequels, and licensed content, saying there’s a lack of original material for film and television.
DEI in the Movies
Some people appreciate the progressive narratives in contemporary films, which often tackle social issues and offer diverse perspectives. They see modern cinema as more inclusive and culturally aware society. However, a broader cultural shift away from progressive wokeism pushes back against cultural agendas in art.
Technology as a Double-Edged Sword
Technological advancements in visual effects evoke mixed reactions. While some marvel at the immersive experiences CGI and AI offer, others say it overshadows the essence of storytelling and character development.
Socio-Political Influences
Modern films increasingly mirror societal challenges, dividing opinions. While some viewers applaud their relevance, others want escapist entertainment that provides relief from real-world tensions.
An Inevitable Conclusion
While most Americans view older films as superior, a vocal minority highlights the value of diversity and contemporary relevance. This debate underscores the evolving relationship between culture, technology, and art, mirroring a dynamic cultural landscape. As the American demographic continues to change, audiences will grapple with these shifts. Their discourse reveals more than cinematic tastes—it offers a window into the changing fabric of society itself.
With just a few more days until the election, MIG Reports data shows Donald Trump leading Kamala Harris 52% to 45% and growing stronger. Recent polls suggest Trump’s message of economic recovery is resonating among an increasingly dissatisfied electorate, while the Harris campaign shows all signs of collapse and panic.
Economy Tops the Charts
Voter frustrations with inflation and the rising cost-of-living continue to dominate conversations. Americans feel the Biden-Harris administration has failed to remedy the economic situation. They also express doubt and confusion about Harris’s campaign proposals for the next four years.
Inflation and Everyday Expenses: Soaring prices for groceries and gas are straining American families. Many recall the lower cost of living under Trump’s administration, leading them to voice support for his return to office.
Independent Swing: Independents are leaning toward Trump 2-to-1, showing decisive momentum shift in the last few months. These voters prioritize economic stability over party loyalty and view Trump as the best solution.
Clarity and Vision Versus Confusion
Trump’s message of “law and order” and promises to “Make America Great Again” once more resonate strongly with voters who seek decisive, pro-America leadership.
Restoring National Pride: Trump is a rallying figure around strong national pride, low taxation, and economic recovery. Harris’s focus on social issues is not resonating with voters who cannot afford their bills.
Election Integrity Worries: Trump’s emphasis on election security is energizing his base. Meanwhile, Harris faces challenges overcoming accusations of elitism and failing to clearly make her presidential pitch to Americans.
Swing State Dynamics
In critical swing states, the economic landscape is tilting the scales in Trump’s favor. Swing states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio show Independents breaking for Trump, often revolving around the economy.
Economic Concerns: Voters in swing states want a Trump economy. They see his tax policy and trade-focused strategies as essential to addressing inflation.
Discontent with Democratic Messaging: Harris’s focus on abortion and social justice is not a high enough priority for undecided voters in these states. They demand clear answers on concrete economic plans.
Turnout and Enthusiasm Gaps: Trump’s rallies in these regions attract large, motivated crowds, suggesting high voter turnout potential. Harris’s campaign events show lower energy, particularly among young and minority voters.
Down-Ballot Implications
This momentum isn’t limited to the presidential election—down-ballot races are also reflecting similar sentiments, with an evident lean toward Republican candidates.
House and Senate: Republican candidates, particularly in districts hard-hit by inflation, are benefiting from Trump’s economic message, showing potential for flipping critical seats in November.
Conservative Resurgence: MAGA down-ballot candidates are leveraging his momentum, fueling voter mobilization in suburban and rural areas. Even some Democratic candidates are beginning to use friendly messaging toward Trump.
Split-Ticket Voting: Some voters also express a willingness to split their tickets to balance local needs with national considerations.
The discussion around border security and immigration remains deeply polarized among American voters. Conversations about the border, particularly focusing on presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, dominate overall public discourse, indicating it’s a top concern. MIG Reports analysis highlights significant differences in public perception and sentiment towards the Republican and Democratic nominees.
An analysis of public sentiment reveals stark differences in support for Kamala Harris and Donald Trump on border security:
Voter sentiment against open borders is strong, averaging 66%.
Harris's support averages around 34%, with only 20% support in broader discussions and up to 67% among Democrats.
Trump enjoys consistent support, averaging 69% across various groups.
He has particularly strong backing from his base—85% support him on border security.
Kamala Harris
Kamala Harris faces a complex and often critical landscape as voters react to her stance on border security. MIG Reports analysis indicates that across national conversations, a large portion of Americans criticize Harris's approach to immigration. Only a minority of supports express agreement or positivity.
Voter sentiment is consistent across broader analyses from Democrat-leaning conversations. This group prioritizes compassion and humane treatment for immigrants, leading to approval for her open border policies.
However, many conversations among Democrats suggest dissatisfaction with the outcomes of her policies, particularly in managing border programs effectively. There is a divide within the Democratic base, where support for Harris’s lenient approach to immigration is mixed. Many feel her policies do not adequately address the complexities of border security.
Most Americans want effective immigration management with accountability and tangible results. Harris's role as a leader and as "border czar" positions her as a figure of both hope and frustration within her party. Responding to criticisms of her administration on border security will likely pose a hurdle for her campaign.
Many Republicans criticize Harris and Democrats’ hypocrisy, pointing out the DNC has strong security and even physical walls. They say Democrats want anyone to enter the country without limitation but protect themselves behind walls and fences.
Watch as Steve tries to help illegal migrant enter the DNC convention, you can image how it went. pic.twitter.com/RdrI0jIZvW
Donald Trump remains a dominant figure in border security conversations, particularly among Republicans. MIG Reports analysis shows overwhelming support for Trump’s hardline stance against open borders and his advocacy for stringent immigration controls.
Trump’s policies, such as the "Remain in Mexico" program, receive strong approval from his base. They view strong measures as essential to protecting national security and upholding the integrity of the immigration system.
Republican voters are strongly aligned with Trump's approach of prioritizing enforcement and deterrence. Theu believe strong border security is synonymous with protecting American jobs and maintaining public safety.
Within party, Trump has overwhelming support. This contrasts with waning support among Democrats for their own leadership. Analysis suggests some Independents and disaffected Democrats are bolstering Trump’s broader support. His consistent message of strict border control and opposition to open borders resonates deeply with Americans who want safety and sovereignty.
This support is not only a reflection of Trump’s influence but an indication of voter priorities as border security remains a top concern. These discussions illustrate the extent to which Trump’s stance on immigration continues to shape and mobilize his base, making him a central figure in the ongoing national debate on border security.
May Gallup reporting shows approximately 65% of Americans think U.S. economic conditions have worsened since 2020, and a similar amount have a negative perspective toward the future. MIG Reports analysis based on online conversations shows a similar 64.64% of Americans have reduced confidence in the U.S. economy.
The -35 index rating in Gallup’s report means, on a scale of +100 to -100, sentiment leans negative.
On a 1-100 scale, it translates to 65% reduced confidence—mirroring MIG Reports weighted analysis within 1%.
Voters Consistently Lack Confidence in the Economy
MIG Reports analysis uses online voter conversation volume regarding the U.S. economy along with sentiment tracking. In this weighted analysis, the aggregate confidence levels show:
64.64% of conversations express decreased confidence in economic prosperity
23.05% reflect a neutral stance
12.31% convey increased confidence
These figures highlight the prevailing skepticism and concern Americans feel about the U.S. economic trajectory. Only a minority of voters maintain confidence or have an optimistic view of the government's current economic management.
MIG Reports data also shows voter views are largely influence by the actions of the Biden-Harris administration—particularly the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Discussions that focus on confidence in economic prosperity are largely among Democratic establishment supporters.
The narrative emerging from these online conversations is one of serious concern about the economy. Most Americans are losing confidence in the economy, the government, and their own futures. While some still hold a neutral or positive outlook, most have become skeptical of the administration, calling for more effective economic governance.
Bidenomics is Decreasing Confidence
American doomerism on the economy stems primarily from rising inflation, increasing costs of living, and a belief in government mismanagement. Many voters believe the IRA has failed to alleviate the economic pressures they face. Instead, they say it has exacerbated inflation through increased government spending.
Conversations focus on "inflation," "rising costs," "spending," and "prices." People also direct frustration and anger at policies they view as disconnected from the public's interests. Sentiments such as "killing us without killing us" encapsulate the dire emotional mood around inflation’s impact on low-income households. This negativity further fuels widespread economic pessimism.
Some Say Hope is not Lost
The 23.05% of conversations which remain neutral on the economy express realism. These Americans acknowledge the challenges posed by inflation but recognize the potential benefits of government intervention.
One potential measure people mention is capping insulin prices and allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. However, many remain uncertain about the long-term effectiveness of such policies. This leads to a mixed feeling of hope and skepticism. This group focuses on "jobs," "investment," "energy," and "climate." They acknowledge the IRA's goals but have reservations about its implementation.
A Few Believe the Talking Points
The smallest percentage of Americans—12.31%—voices support for of the IRA and other government initiatives. They tout Biden-Harris success reports like job creation in the clean energy sector, lower healthcare costs, and efforts to rein in corporate power.
These conversations often use keywords like "success," "jobs," "lower costs," and "investment" to emphasize the positive impacts of the Biden administration's policies. Supporters argue these measures are instrumental in building a more resilient economy and improving the lives of middle-class families.
Recently, prominent political figures have sparked significant discourse by suggesting President Biden drop out of the race. This notion has generated a mixed reactions among Americans and revealing deep divisions within the Democratic Party.
Discussions primarily revolve around Biden's age and infirmity, recent and relentless gaffes, and his perceived electability against Donald Trump. The growing list, as of this writing, of influential figures who are questioning Biden or calling on home to drop include:
George Clooney (who recently raised $30,000,000 for Biden’s campaign)
Sen. Michael Bennett (CO)
Sen. Jon Tester (MT)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (OH)
Sen. Peter Welch (VT)
Sen. Patty Murray (WA)
Rep. Raul Grijalva (AZ)
Rep. Greg Stanton (AZ)
Rep. Adam Schiff (CA)
Rep. Scott Peters (CA)
Rep. Jim Himes (CT)
Rep. Ed Case (HI)
Rep. Mike Quigley (IL)
Rep. Eric Sorensen (IL)
Rep. Brad Schneider (IL)
Rep. Seth Moulton (MA)
Rep. Jamie Raskin (MD)
Rep. Hillary Scholten (MI)
Rep. Angie Craig (MN)
Rep. Mikie Sherrill (NJ)
Rep. Pat Ryan (NY)
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (OR)
Rep. Adam Smith (WA)
Gov. Maura Healy (MA)
Downward Trajectory
Trending online conversations suggest a growing frustration among Democrats, particularly those identifying as progressives or left-leaning centrists. They feel increasingly uncertain about Biden's ability to secure a victory in the next election.
Many express concerns Biden continuing his campaign may weaken the party's chances. They advocate for someone younger or different to take the mantle, like Vice President Kamala Harris. This sentiment aligns with demographic patterns where younger voters and minority groups appear less enthusiastic about a second Biden term compared to their initial support in the 2020 election.
Criticism of Biden's slip-up on the first question of his “big boy” press conference, referring to Vice President Kamala Harris as "President Trump," highlights fears about his mental acuity and readiness for another term. This gaffe has been weaponized by both the right and the far left to question his competency. Many also continue to question his physical health and stamina.
Some liberal voices within media spheres criticize the Democratic establishment for being slow to address internal calls for change, hinting at a desire for rejuvenated leadership.
Looking Ahead
Undecided and Independent voters seem torn between dissatisfaction with Biden's current administration and dread of returning to Trump-era policies. A potential alternative candidate for the Democratic Party may become a significant factor as these voters gravitate toward stability and effective governance.
Economic factors like inflation, which the administration claims is improving, and public safety concerns, such as the crime surge near Times Square, also shape the political battleground. How candidates address these issues will likely influence centrist support.
Younger voters, urban residents, and progressive activists want new Democratic leadership. Older voters and centrist Democrats tend to prefer an experienced candidate like Biden. This internal divide reflects broader national sentiments of political fatigue and desire for change.
Among Independents, there is a notable inclination to support candidates who offer pragmatic solutions over entrenched partisanship. This demographic often swings elections and currently shows a readiness to evaluate alternatives critically before making their final decisions. They focus heavily on economic stability, crime reduction, and foreign policy, as seen in their reactions to Biden's recent aid packages for Ukraine and legislative actions blocked by Senate Democrats.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
_.png)
_.png)
_.png)
_.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
_.png)
_.png)
_.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)