A video went viral which claimed President Joe Biden may have soiled himself during the 80th Anniversary of D-Day in France. Other videos showed First Lady Jill Biden swiftly leading the president away while French President Macron thanked veterans.
MIG Reports analysis of social media commentary shows different interpretations of what Joe Biden was doing in the video, like many of his well-publicized gaffes. Most of the online speculation is based on unverified rumors and has not been officially confirmed or denied by any credible sources.
Because online discussion is so fractured, it's difficult to discern a majority consensus on whether people actually believe Biden experienced such an embarrassing mishap as incontinence. The political nature of conversations about president and his questionable cognition, as well as the overall mockery and humorous tones of social media make people’s true beliefs somewhat opaque.
Most Americans seem to believe the claim that Biden soiled his pants and take it as an opportunity to fuel political debate and criticisms. Many openly ridicule Biden with profane language and derisive commentary. Some Biden defenders dismiss the claim, but only citing their reasons as emphasizing more serious issues like the necessity to impeach Biden.
Despite rampant online memeing and speculations, no official denials have been made by White House officials.
Discussion and Sentiment Trends
There is an undeniable presence of derisive rhetoric from Biden's detractors. They use phrases like "poopy pants" and "filled his adult diaper" when talking about the video. Some insinuate Biden's inability to control bodily functions is evidence of weakness or mental decline.
On the other hand, some dismiss the accusations as baseless and criticize those who spread such rumors. They emphasize a lack of concrete evidence for the claim, pushing back against unfounded speculations. They emphasize other issues they believe should take precedence over personal ridicule, like impeachment inquiries and political wrongdoings.
Alternative Analysis
Some media outlets reported the incident as simply a momentary lapse in judgement. They say the president thought there was a chair behind him. Additional reporting from liberal blogs and op-eds crafted stories to shift away from the viral mockery, such as “Joe Biden Didn’t Poop Himself But These Celebs Did.” Other outlets had body language experts weigh in.
Overall distrust in liberal and mainstream media suggests Americans who believe Biden’s senior moment was more embarrassing than searching for a missing chair would not be swayed by media spin.
Vice President Kamala Harris recently appeared on Jimmy Kimmel Live and made waves with her comments about former president Trump’s conviction. Among other things, the VP said, “The reality is, cheaters don’t like getting caught,” referring to Trump and implying he cheated in the 2016 election.
Many Americans took her comments as an admission that continued prosecutions against Trump are politically motivated and retributive. Much of the response displays contempt and dissatisfaction towards her and Joe Biden's administration with accusations of lying, weakening the country, and serving their own self-interests — a common sentiment when the Vice President speaks publicly.
While conservatives reacted negatively to Harris’s comments about Trump and liberals cheered, pro-Palestine protesters overshadowed the conversation. Video emerged on social media showing protesters interrupting the Jimmy Kimmel Live taping to shout at Harris saying, “Stop the genocide” and “15,000 children dead because of you.”
Most of the reactions to the video are from progressive Democrats who agree with the protesters or conservatives who enjoy the hilarity of Democrat infighting.
What People Are Saying About Harris on Kimmel
Conversations about the VP’s late night TV appearance predominantly disapprove. Conservatives and Trump supporters are critical of Harris's statements and liberals dislike her actions regarding Israel.
People argue over Trump’s conviction, Biden's potential corruption, the Biden-Harris Administration's current policies, and questions about their allegiance towards America. Anti-Trump conversation skews more positively towards Harris's remarks. This group says Trump was found guilty by a jury of his peers and the trial was a necessary measure ensuring justice is served.
Usually liberals, those agreeing with Harris frame the conviction as the consequence for breaking the law and claim nobody is above the law. They criticize suggestions of political persecution as attempts to destroy democracy and undermine the justice system.
More conservative and Republican-leaning voters view Harris's statement with outrage, denial, or frustration. Many have frequently accused her and other Democrats of being driven by bias against Trump. They believe accusations that Trump cheated in the election are false and believe his prosecutions are politically motivated witch hunts.
Kamala Harris’s typically low approval saw a slight boost after her Kimmel appearance, suggesting anti-Trump viewers approved of her comments.
However, Donald Trump’s national approval has held steady and even increased since his conviction, suggesting many believe in Democrats having political motivations.
Belief in a Weaponized Court
Many voters express continued strong support for Trump, endorsing his candidacy for the 2024 presidency. They also criticize the Biden Administration and the current state of the nation. These voters accuse Democrats and the deep state of corruption, interfering in elections, ignoring laws, and politicizing the court system.
There is a palpable belief that Trump was unfairly targeted and condemned to hamper his campaign rather than any actual misconduct. People say the conviction is an abuse of power by the Democrats to target their political opponents and a disastrous violation of norms. They compare ongoing lawfare to actions seen in authoritarian regimes.
MIG Reports analysis suggest most Americans believe the justice system has been weaponized for partisan reasons. Those on the left believe the courts are biased in Trump’s favor. Those on the right believe Democrats are using a corrupt judiciary to attack their political opponents.
On the day of Trump’s conviction in New York, national sentiment towards “weaponization of government,” dropped dramatically.
Sentiment went from the around 44% the week before to 37% on the day Trump was convicted, suggesting many people viewed the trial as an abuse of the court system.
The Biden administration's mixed messages about cryptocurrencies have stirred confusion, dismay, and frustration among American crypto users. Many views depend on what people think about regulation in general, but some are worried about the inconsistency and potential negative impact the Biden administration’s uncertainty may have on the cryptocurrency market.
Earlier in May, a joint resolution to overturn SAB 121 gained enthusiastic bipartisan support in Congress, including from Democrats like Chuck Schumer and Cory Booker.This sea change among Democrats in Congress sparked speculations about a pivot on crypto from the Biden Administration. However, Biden followed through in his promise to veto the resolution to repeal SAB 121.
Crypto Voters Are Angry
Crypto-influenced voters are now annoyed by POTUS's reconfirmed hostility and waffling on crypto. Many assert that vetoing the resolution is a nonsensical move, as SAB 121 is neither approved nor GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). They see it as an unnecessary kick at the "cyber hornet's nest."
Voters demand action instead of mere posturing. And many who were skeptical of a true Biden pivot are now doubling down on their disapproval. Even Democratic voters who support the rest of Joe Biden’s platform are critical of his cryptocurrency policy. They say his lack of clarity is a hindrance to the development and adoption of crypto technologies.
People are also frustrated with the unclear messaging, saying that if Biden was hoping to court crypto voters, he’s doing an exceptionally poor job. Many in the crypto community are also discussing whether crypto voters as a demographic are a much larger group than the Biden White House anticipates. They say he could be severely hurting his already struggling presidential campaign by upsetting crypto holders.
The bipartisan engagement among members of the House and Senate creates a sharp contrast with Joe Biden’s anti-crypto stance. Figures like Democratic Rep. Mike Flood and Republican Senator Ted Cruz taking joining on pro-crypto issues gains them approval. Cruz's initiative for operating Bitcoin miners in Texas has gained him popularity in the crypto community.
Biden’s approval on crypto is consistently lower than sentiment toward pro-crypto politicians – especially Donald Trump.
While there is some fluctuation, Trump’s crypto approval trends similarly with overall crypto approval while Biden dipped from 52% to 45% the day before his veto.
Donald Trump is Successfully Courting the Crypto Crowd
While criticism continues toward Biden, another trending topic among American crypto voters
is a rumored discussion on crypto policy between Elon Musk and Donald Trump. The news sparked controversy as some who dislike both men ridicule them, while others are hopeful a collaboration may lead to more pro-crypto policies.
Musk denied the rumors, saying he didn't discuss crypto policy with Trump. However, he expressed support for any initiative that moves power from government to the people, which he says includes crypto.
Regardless of whether the rumors are true, many are positive about Trump’s recent crypto support, hoping more discussions lead to more crypto-friendly. They’re especially hopeful if Trump returns to the White House.
Rumors about Trump’s potential crypto policies in general have sparked a flurry of conversations leading to speculation about the role crypto will play in Trump's election campaign. Those who are highly motivated by crypto say it is part of their livelihood and important enough to vote on in the presidential election.
Claudia Sheinbaum was elected as Mexico's first female president, which has led to a flurry of public reactions. The assassination of at least 37 political candidates in Mexico has also stirred trepidation. MIG Reports analysis shows increasing worry about what this means for safety and sovereignty in the United States.
Sentiment Analysis
Online commentary links Sheinbaum to drug cartels, suggesting she was elected by their influence. This belief causes a deep concern about Mexico's ongoing accommodation of drug trafficking and related violence. Sheinbaum's election adds to a narrative of skepticism about her ability to improve the situation. With forecasts that Sheinbaum would win, there was an immediate drop in sentiment from American observers.
Some voices accuse Sheinbaum of being a socialist who will worsen the crisis of illegal immigration in the United States. This prospect also increases concerns about threats to American national security posed by drug cartels who may operate more freely.
Many voters express disappointment, anger, and fear, at the implications of a Sheinbaum presidency, citing likely increases in drug trafficking, violent crime, and illegal immigration in the U.S.
Many also suggest Sheinbaum's victory is meaningless due to Mexican election being commandeered by the cartels. People also view Sheinbaum as having ineffective and socialist policies.
Sheinbaum’s supporters online celebrate the historic significance of her achievement as Mexico's first female president. Some of the supportive commentary is hopeful she will focus on curbing Mexico's high murder rate, which is largely caused by cartel activity.
Discussion Analysis
Some of the top discussion topics related to Sheinbaum’s election include:
The potential for continued lax border control policies
People argue for stricter policies both on drug control and border security
Notably, there is little sentiment noted about Sheinbaum's policies or ideas beyond the issues of drugs and immigration. This suggests broader understanding of her platform has been overshadowed by these dominant concerns.
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:
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.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently publicly issued a rare critique of U.S. President Joe Biden. He argued Biden’s decision to allow Ukrainian attacks on Russia with American weapons does not go far enough.
Speaking at Asia's top security summit in Singapore, Zelensky thanked Biden for allowing Ukraine to strike limited Russian territory with U.S. arms. But he also insisted the restrictions Biden included should be lifted.
MIG Reports analysis shows various sentiment and discussion trends among Americans on this subject. News about the Biden administration providing weapons to Ukraine for strikes in Russian territory are divisive. Comments and reactions are polarized and indicate a stagnation in support for Ukraine.
Views of Russia Conflict
Potential Conflict Escalation
Some Americans express concern that U.S. involvement in arming Ukraine could spur a wider conflict. They even fear potentially sparking a World War, causing skepticism, caution, and objections.
Broad Global Context
People draw parallels with Ukraine and conflicts in other foreign countries. Rising tensions in Israel, China, Iran, and others increase worries. Voters fear foreign relations with these countries—either friendly or confrontational—could be influenced or affected by America's role in Ukraine.
Russia and Putin
There are some who emphasize Russia's aggression, expressing support for Ukraine. However, a mirror of such sentiments sympathizes with Russia, juxtaposing the country's supposed intentions with those of the U.S. and NATO.
Among international concerns is an emphasis on domestic issues and internal politics within the U.S. Many voters talk about the divide at home among political leaders and previous administrations. Domestic worries seem to complicate American views on global politics, influencing their reactions.
Views of Ukraine
Escalation
American voters are divided over the Biden administration's decision to provide weapons to Ukraine for strikes within Russian territory. Some support Ukraine's fight for freedom and others sympathizing with Russia, worried about further straining U.S.-Russia relations.
Broad Global Context
Many express disappointment with Ukraine's stance on Israel and Palestine, shifting support among some who initially backed Ukraine. Historical references to events like the Vietnam War highlight concerns about U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts.
Financial Concerns
Some Americans see the decision as a strategic move in proxy wars, while others criticize the financial burden of sending substantial funds overseas. They argue taxpayer money would be better spent on domestic issues.
Domestic and Geopolitical Trends
Opinions on Ukraine are often linked to views on Israel, influencing support or criticism of Biden's actions. There are also concerns about China's growing power in the drone market and beliefs that U.S. foreign policy under Trump would improve regarding Ukraine and Israel.
Like in the case of Russia, there are those who relate Ukraine relations to American domestic politics. The sentiment that a change in administration could help prevails. Many insinuate a Trump administration would improve U.S. foreign policy, particularly concerning Ukraine and Israel.
Overall sentiment is concern and critique of U.S. and Ukrainian foreign policies. Many perceive Biden’s move to provide weapons as an escalation of a dangerous military conflict rather than a solution to an ongoing political crisis. They argue the roots of the problem lie within manipulative international politics and a harmful approach to foreign policy.
Recent reporting on Boston Mayor Michelle Wu's potential decision to give children a role in budgeting priorities is being mocked online. The program, which was approved in 2021, aims to include all residents in budget participation, even kids as young as 11. Boston City Council members are also criticizing Wu, calling the plan “unserious” and “wholly inappropriate.”
Not just a political issue, many apolitical citizens are criticizing the move with the same arguments many right leaning partisans are using. Liberals are also apprehensive of supporting the plan. While some consider the proposal inclusive, others vehemently oppose it. For the most part, progressives are either silent on the issue or pushing back.
While there is general negativity toward a participatory budgeting process, most of the negative reactions are from conservatives and Republicans who criticize liberal leaders. Many seem concerned about the concentration of power and the potential influence of leftist ideologies in the decision-making process. There are strong references to the concept of "wokeness" and its impact on these decisions.
Many view the proposed plan as the result of ideological pushes toward diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), with some framing it as possible indoctrination. Some of these reactions also follow larger discussion trends amongst conservatives regarding freedom of speech.
Positive reactions predominantly come from those who hold progressive or left-wing ideologies. They point to inclusivity, representation, and potential contributions to the betterment of society, praising the decision. This group seems more enthusiastic about child involvement, often framing it as a necessary step towards a more diverse and fair society.
This inclusive view is not representative of all Democratic Party members, though. Council Member Ed Flynn (D) published a letter to Director Renato Castelo saying, "I am writing to again emphasize my unequivocal and vehement opposition to the voting process for project proposals from the Office of Participatory Budgeting, particularly in allowing residents as young as 11 years-old to vote for projects to be earmarked.”
There are also responses that are not politically motivated. This group is concerned with the logistical and practical implications of participatory budgeting. They question the decision-making abilities of children and whether they have the necessary understanding and maturity to make these choices.
Immediately following his widely controversial conviction in New York City, former president Donald Trump:
Raised more than $200 million.
Created a TikTok account and gained 4.1 million followers.
Continued to climb in betting markets for the 2024 Presidential election.
Since the end of May, Polymarket odds show Trump above a 50% chance at the presidency, hitting 56% over the weekend.
MIG Reports analysis shows Trump’s conviction created a significant and increasing level of support from his followers, despite the legal troubles. This is evident from various voter groups emerging on social media demonstrating overwhelming support directly because of the verdict. It appears the conviction has served to galvanize his support base.
From posts on social media, many of his supporters view his conviction as a political move by Democrats to "get Trump.” This view is echoed across various posts and groups, framing the entire legal process as a leftist attempt to target Trump. Many compare the legal measures against Trump to a lack of action against other political figures on the left, further cementing the view of political bias in the justice system.
There is a suggestion that political attacks against Trump have made MAGA stronger, implying the adversity is energizing Americans against Democrats. A sense of being “on the attack” over the perceived victimization of Trump is overwhelming in online discussions, particularly in those referring to Trump as an outlaw and a strong American.
Many voters suggest the election in November will see Trump return as President, indicating an expectation of his perseverance. Many also reminisce about his leadership, wishing to see him back in office, despite the conviction. Many are also talking about the major influx in campaign contributions post-conviction, underscoring the financial support backing him.
There are some posts critical of Trump and his supporters, describing his followers as a cult, decrying the narrative that he is a victim. Many among the opposition take every opportunity to refer to him as a convicted felon. It appears, however, that these criticisms are outweighed by the volume of support shown for Trump in the aftermath of the conviction.
Recent House subcommittee hearings with Dr. Anthony Fauci have brought conversations about COVID-19 and vaccines to the fore. As more information comes out and members of Congress question Fauci about his role in alleged information suppression during COVID, Americans’ trauma and anger seems to be boiling up.
Fauci's credibility is in question with heated and partisan disagreements about whether American voters believe what he says. Some accuse him of providing conflicting or misleading informationwith guidance on masks and COVID origins. There are frequent complaints that he continued to back policies such as social distancing and masking children in the absence of substantial scientific proof for effectiveness.
In general, people express frustration and confusion at the perceived inconsistency. There is also significant suspicion that Fauci and others involved in both pandemic response and pharmaceuticals related to COVID vaccines intentionally hid, obfuscated, and suppressed important information.
What Americans Are Saying
Online conversations show strong disapproval toward inadequate and questionable management decisions during COVID by health officials and politicians. Many condemn mask mandates and vaccine shaming which they say was perpetuated by Fauci and the media. This group vocally blames Fauci for death, illnesses, and social and economic consequences associated COVID-19 restrictions and vaccines.
There is still considerable debate on the efficacy and safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Many are also expressing concern about potential side effects such as DNA alterations, increased risk of cancer, heart conditions, and sudden deaths.
Many on both sides of the political aisle have become skeptical and disillusioned with COVID narratives presented by Fauci, the media, and politicians. Those who remain strongly in support of Fauci tend to be left leaning. They view him as a competent authority figure, accusing his detractors of being political. They maintain Fauci's policies saved countless lives during a dangerous pandemic and provided necessary restrictions.
Conversations about COVID often also include criticism of government actions in 2020 and the divisive role of media and political narratives in shaping public opinion.
Anger Over COVID Origins
One recurring topic is the origin of the virus. Many suggest COVID-19 virus was a product of gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. They blame Fauci for allegedly funding the research, suggesting he conspired to insulate himself from any repercussions.
Many people are also angry at the lack of consequences for the actions of officials who, voters believe, lied and covered up their own unethical behavior.
There is also some discussion about former president Donald Trump’s role in handling COVID. Many voters, including some of his supporters, criticize how President Trump handled the crisis and his rhetoric since. Most voters seem to have a negative view of any topic related to COVID.
Vaccine Skepticism
A significant portion of Americans are increasingly suspicious of the COVID-19 vaccines. They attribute a variety of adverse events, including sudden death and severe physical ailments, to the vaccines.
There’s talk about conditions people call "turbo cancer" and claims the vaccines alter human DNA in a way that can be passed on to future generations. This group is also highly critical of Dr. Fauci, questioning his integrity and blaming him for the negative effects they believe are related to the vaccines.
Those who believe vaccines are harmful are also likely to believe officials like Fauci participated in cynical cover-ups to suppress information and disparage dissenters. Recent testimony by Fauci only serves to further infuriate this group, entrenching their views that Fauci, big pharma, and the NIH conspired to protect themselves at the expense of public health.
Mainstream Media and Chris Cuomo
Many discussions also involve a deep-rooted distrust in mainstream media and institutions who remain "deathly silent" on the impact of COVID and emerging accusations. Some Americans accuse healthcare providers and media of altering death reports, misrepresenting vaccine safety, and silencing counter narratives
Infuriated voters call out media outlets and figures forignoring critical pieces of information and remaining silent about perceived dangers of the vaccines. They also blame mainstream media for gaslighting and shaming Americans about COVID restrictions and vaccines.
A recent debate between Chris Cuomo and Dave Smith also generated viral discussion about Ivermectin, a drug notoriously debated during COVID-19. Cuomo’s claim that he did not agree with the criticism Joe Rogan received for advocating Ivermectin was very negatively received. The debate brought Cuomo’s credibility and consistency into question for many viewers.
Many people are labeling Cuomo a “liar,” suggesting the evidence contradicts Cuomo's denials about his role in shaping public opinion. This group believes Cuomo and others in the media intentionally demonized people who questioned the mainstream narrative. They insist these figures continue to ignore objective analysis as it unfolds.
.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)