The recent inflation report and Consumer Price Index (CPI) report show a significant increase in prices. The inflation rate has soared, signaling a heightened cost of living for Americans. The CPI report, a measure that examines the weighted average of prices of a basket of consumer goods and services, such as transportation, food, and medical care, has seen a corresponding spike.

Sentiment among Americans towards these economic indicators is largely negative. This is not only rooted in the immediate impact of higher prices but also in a broader concern about the state of the economy. Confidence in the market is shaky, and this uncertainty seems to decrease public trust towards the Biden administration.

Along demographic lines, political affiliation plays a significant role in shaping sentiments. Democrats are more likely to view the situation as temporary or a result of global economic conditions. Republicans are more inclined to blame the current administration for the economic situation.

Race also plays a role in voter perceptions. Minority communities, particularly African Americans and Hispanics who are more likely to be in the lower economic strata, are feeling the brunt of the inflation more and struggling to get jobs. Their sentiment towards the current economic situation and trust in the government can be described as highly skeptical and frustrated.

The middle and lower classes are the most impacted by rising inflation. These groups are expressing a higher degree of dissatisfaction and are more likely to hold a negative perception of the market and the current administration.

Geographically, there is a negative outlook – but for varying reasons. In urban areas, where public transportation is more accessible, the impact of gas prices may be less felt than in suburban and rural areas where people rely heavily on personal vehicles. However, price increases on food and general cost of living have increased concerns about inflation for most Americans. The reasons for negative sentiment and a lack of confidence in the government vary among voter groups but are similar in terms of volume.

Increasing prices, such as the surge in the national gas prices from $3.61 for regular, $4.39 for premium, and $4.05 for diesel since February 19, has also sparked concerns and discontent. These price jumps are impacting American households and businesses, particularly those in lower economic classes and in regions where commuting is essential.

Other timely economic indicators seem to mirror distrust and general dissatisfaction. Following the inflation and CPI reports being released, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 300 points. Several news outlets are covering the issue despite a history of complying with President Biden’s request to cover economic news with more positively.

Recent reporting revealed quiet steps the Biden administration has taken regarding asylum cases, angering voters. The executive order partially suspends asylum requests at the U.S.-Mexico border when unauthorized crossings exceed 2,500 foreigners a day (912,000 a year). However, the suspension excludes two key immigration classes:

• Unaccompanied children
• Credible Fear applicants (an immigration process which leads to asylum)

Executive guidance for handling Credible Fear applicants suggests it will likely result in a loophole that still allows asylum, even beyond the daily crossings cap. In the minds of many Americans, the effectively creates mass amnesty without regard to voters desires to close the border.

Furthermore, since 2022, more than 350,000 asylum cases were closed by the U.S. government for those who don’t have a criminal record or are otherwise not deemed a threat to the country. A Venezuelan illegal alien who shot two NYPD officers was among the 350,000 to have his case closed, causing objections to what are deemed as threats to the country.

MIG Reports analysis of voter reactions shows a continuing distrust in current border policies and the Biden administration.

Immigration Issues

There are recurring discussions about the border wall initiated under former President Trump's administration. Many who view the border as a crisis would like to see it completed. However, discussions about the border wall indicate a consensus that a physical barrier is not the full solution to border control issues. Most believe we need a more sophisticated approach to managing the U.S. border.

Some voters express disapproval of the Republican Party's stance on the border crisis. They accuse the GOP of voicing their grievances but not acting decisively when given the opportunity to pass a bill. The frustration and dissatisfaction seems to come from both sides.

There are disparate views on the effectiveness of Trump's border policies and the border wall. Some argue Trump was successful in reducing illegal crossings and accuse Democrats of hindering border control efforts. The sentiment here is defensive and leans towards praise for Trump's efforts.

In general, both political parties blame the other side for issues at the border.

Border Security

Online conversations show overwhelming negativity towards the open borders policy, rampant illegal immigration, and the resulting consequences under the Biden administration. There is a high volume of posts calling for stricter immigration regulations, deportations, and blaming illegal immigrants for crime. Negative sentiment towards Biden is particularly strong, with allegations of dishonesty and perceived political maneuvering.

A minority of voters challenge the idea that current policies promote open borders, accusing critics of lying or of manufacturing political controversies. Usually Democrats, this group tends to question the integrity of politicians or citizens making open borders claims.

Despite Republicans hoping to keep the spotlight on Biden’s vulnerabilities and panic among Democrats, there is still significant interest in Trump’s choice for a running mate. Current discussions about Donald Trump's potential VP picks are heating up as people anticipate his impending announcement. MIG Reports data suggest top choices in terms of voter support volume and approval sentiment include Ben Carson, J.D. Vance, Marco Rubio, and Byron Donalds.

Within MAGA, there is a strong sentiment against anyone viewed as a RINO (Republican in Name Only). Figures like Doug Burgum and Marco Rubio have come under scrutiny for their insufficient alignment with the MAGA agenda.

Conversely, loyalty to Trump and America First is a crucial criterion for many supporters. Names like J.D. Vance and Ben Carson are frequently mentioned as preferable picks. Vance has garnered support for his commitment to America First and his potential appeal to younger and Rust Belt voters. Similarly, Ben Carson receives praise for his loyalty and personal integrity. However, there are concerns about his age and political charisma.

• MIG Reports data shows Ben Carson leading in both voter support at around 15% and approval sentiment staying above 50% in the last week.
• J.D. Vance is both generating buzz and garnering support with a 13% second position and 48% approval.
• Rubio and Donalds both have lesser support, both around 7% and approval around 48% and 52% respectively.

Speculation About Trump’s Strategy

MAGA and GOP voters are speculating about possible strategies Trump make take to choose his running mate. One prevalent theme is his inclination to choose a Vice President who can expand his voter base by adding a fresh and dynamic appeal. With this strategy J.D. Vance frequently emerges as a favored candidate.

Despite some vocal opposition within the conservative sphere over Vance's past criticisms of Trump, his staunch support in recent years has earned him significant backing. Proponents argue that Vance's youth and vigor could help extend Trump's influence.

Some highlight the potential of picking someone with a strong appeal to minority groups and independents. Candidates like Byron Donalds and Doug Burgum are cited for their potential to attract these voter demographics. Donalds, with his compelling life story and intellect, could resonate with educated minorities and counter the Democratic narratives. Meanwhile, Burgum's less controversial, steady leadership style and his appeal to women and independents due to his moderate positions in certain areas are considered valuable.

Lastly, MAGA voters stress the necessity for a VP who aligns closely with Trump’s vision and can enhance his governance without overshadowing him. Loyalty is paramount, for those hoping for someone who won’t divert from Trump’s established agenda. They want a harmonious and effective administration, as many MAGA voters have adopted criticisms of Trump’s former VP Mike Pence.

While ideological alignment and loyalty are paramount, strategic considerations are also at play. For example, the potential disadvantage of removing Vance from the Senate, where every vote is critical, is a point of concern. There are also mixed feelings about selecting a current governor or senator who might face political complications or risks in their home states, which could impact the broader Republican strategy. Several people also mention those they view as out of the running like Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley and Kristi Noem.

J.D. Vance

JD Vance brings a fresh perspective to the political scene, particularly appealing to younger voters. His non-traditional background and vocal stance against establishment norms mirror Trump’s outsider appeal.

Vance's life story, including his rise from a challenging upbringing to a successful career, resonates with voters who admire resilience and the American Dream narrative. Nonetheless, his past criticisms of Trump and the controversy over his rapid turnaround might alienate some of Trump's hardcore base.

His stance on controversial issues like abortion may polarize the electorate further, potentially undermining his candidacy. However, Vance’s appeal to the Rust Belt may be an asset, as this could help shore up crucial electoral support in that region.

Marco Rubio

Marco Rubio comes with significant political experience and a robust foreign policy background. His Cuban heritage and strong stance against Beijing make him an appealing candidate for voters concerned with global issues and Hispanic voter outreach.

Rubio's presidential run in 2016 elevated his profile, making him a recognizable and seasoned choice. Despite these strengths, his earlier clashes with Trump during the 2016 primaries might still linger in the minds of some Trump loyalists. His career political background might not excite the anti-establishment wing of Trump's base, who dislike swamp figures.

Some hope Rubio’s comparatively moderate image may draw in independents and suburban voters. However, many MAGA voters recall his affiliation with establishment politics, labeling him a RINO. Discussions frequently center on his neo-conservative stances, past failures to strongly back Trump during critical moments, and his immigration stance.

Ben Carson

Ben Carson has a significant base due to his unwavering loyalty to Trump and his moral compass, which resonates with many conservative voters. His background as a neurosurgeon and his calm, thoughtful demeanor make him a credible choice for those seeking stability and ethics in leadership.

However, Carson’s relatively low political profile and lack of forceful public presence have some critics labeling him as a "yes man." This diminishes his appeal among voters who want a more dynamic and assertive figure to energize the ticket. He generally appeals to voters who value integrity and decency.

Byron Donalds

Byron Donalds brings a strong narrative to the table, particularly his life story which could resonate with minority voters. His articulate opposition to Democratic policies makes him a favorite among conservatives looking for younger and more diverse leadership within the GOP.

Donalds' appeal lies in his potential to bridge gaps and bring new demographics into the fold, particularly educated minorities who feel disillusioned by current Democratic leadership. However, his relatively recent emergence on the national stage may work against him, as some question if he has the experience necessary.

Byron Donalds, while relatively less talked about in mainstream narratives, has a strong following among hardcore Trump supporters. His credentials as a staunch conservative and his energetic presence resonate with voters who want a VP who can actively fight for Trump’s policies.

Online discourse regarding Kamala Harris's campaign strategy shows her messaging has generated conflicting responses from Democrats and overall voters. There's enthusiasm driven by her focus on healthcare and abortion as well as skepticism of her ties to the political establishment. Voter dialogue about her campaign tactics offers insights into the likelihood of strong voter turnout.

Democratic and Left-Leaning Voters

Increased Enthusiasm and Desire to Vote

Younger progressives and left-leaning voters who resonate with Harris's focus on progressive issues like climate change and abortion show notable enthusiasm. This group, particularly active on social media, expresses a strong commitment to voting, with many driven by the urgency of countering conservative policies.

However, this enthusiasm is tempered by frustrations with a lack of substantial progress during Harris’s tenure as vice president. Some voters, particularly those who feel the Biden-Harris administration has been too complacent, express disillusionment.

A duality between excitement and frustration suggests that while Harris may energize younger and more progressive voter groups, there is also a significant portion who feel less motivated to support her campaign.

Cultural Force vs. Establishment Sentiment

Harris’s candidacy presents a cultural narrative that elicits admiration and skepticism. Her identity as a woman of color in a prominent political position is a source of pride for many progressives. These supporters view her as a trailblazer, embodying diversity and progress in American politics.

However, criticisms from within her own base label her as a product of the political establishment. These voters say her candidacy was an edict by elite political figures who wanted to push Joe Biden out, rather than a grassroots movement. This raises doubts about her authenticity and her ability to bring about real change.

General Electorate and Swing State Voters

Increased Enthusiasm and Desire to Vote

In the broader electorate, Harris’s campaign generates both enthusiasm and skepticism. Supporters, particularly those who resonate with her healthcare policies, such as “Medicare at Home,” express strong support. These voters, often from swing states, feel personal investment in progressive policies, driving their desire to vote.

However, many remain skeptical, particularly moderates and conservatives who criticize her policies and question her leadership. This polarization damages unity around her candidacy, even withing the base. Enthusiasm is largely concentrated among her core progressive supporters.

Cultural Forces and Establishment Sentiment

Harris’s position as a cultural icon, particularly among minority communities, continues to shape dialogue around her campaign. Supporters view her candidacy as a significant step forward in representation, linking her identity as a black woman to broader narratives of progress and equity.

Her identity narrative is undermined by critiques about position her as an establishment figure. Detractors argue that her rise to power is the result of a political coup, rather than her merit as a candidate. This contradiction of identity versus establishment skepticism is a central theme of her campaign.

The Harris campaign is fractured, driven by a mix of progressive enthusiasm and critiques of establishment politics.

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.

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

— @amuse (@amuse) August 21, 2024

Donald Trump

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.