Recent MIG data shows that online discussion about an impeachment inquiry against President Biden has not yet garnered wide attention, although there is some increase.

• Discussion jumped from 506 to 1,278 people talking about “impeachment” between December 10 and 11.
• Sentiment toward the subject dropped from 47% to 46% on the same days.
• What discussion does exist seems to be split according to political leanings.

Comments in Favor of Impeachment

• Some argue there is evidence that President Biden had illicit interactions with unspecified individuals and should therefore be impeached.
• Some believe that the President acted illegally or unethically regarding his family's business interests, citing an Associated Press poll that 70% of Americans, including 40% of Democrats, support this view.
• Users point to the alleged spending of Hunter Biden as a potential point of investigation and grounds for impeachment.
• Some mention that the House is expected to vote on an impeachment inquiry due to alleged evidence that Biden had multiple interactions with his son's foreign business associates.
• Some argue that Biden lied about his son's activities, which they view as grounds for impeachment.

Comments Against Impeachment

• Some argue that Republicans are seeking to impeach Biden without any concrete evidence of wrongdoing.
• Arguments that the impeachment inquiry is a political move by Republicans aimed at undermining Biden's presidency.
• Some vocally support Biden and Harris and plan to vote for Democrats in future elections, suggesting they do not support the impeachment inquiry.
• Users cited Mitt Romney's statement that he has not seen any evidence to authorize the impeachment inquiry.
• Some people argue that the situation in the country would be much worse if Biden was not the president, indicating they do not support the impeachment.

Homeschooling in Brazil

Discussion About Homeschooling

MIG data shows that online discussions about homeschooling in Brazil are not particularly prominent.

• Low discussion suggests that it may not be a popular topic of conversation in relation to other current events or that it does not generate as much controversy or attention as other issues.
• However, the lack of discussion on homeschooling does not necessarily reflect a lack of interest or importance of the issue in the broader Brazilian context.

The top discussion topics in Brazil over the last 30 days do not include anything specifically related to homeschooling or education regulations.

Public Discussion About Education

• There is some discussion about education secretaries working on reinforcement schooling in 2024 due to almost 80% of students not learning anything during the pandemic.
• There are some calls for the adoption of homeschooling in response to Brazil's poor performance in PISA, a global student assessment.
• The fact that Bolsonaro's government had four Ministers of Education, each seemingly worse than the last, is also a point of dissatisfaction.

Jair Bolsonaro

Sentiment seems predominantly negative for Bolsonaro.

Positive

• Some defend Bolsonaro, arguing that he kept the country financially stable during the pandemic.
• They say poor performance in education is due to a system deeply entrenched in Marxism.
• Some also suggest that the criticisms are unfair given that Bolsonaro only had four years in power compared to the 14 years of PT rule.

Negative

• Some express disgust towards Bolsonaro, with references to a friend of his allegedly making inappropriate comments about women.
• Accusations of Bolsonaro inciting a coup, accusations that he’s a thief and corrupt with some demanding his arrest.
• Many criticisms focus on Bolsonaro's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, with accusations of negligence and delay in vaccine procurement, contributing to a high death toll.
• Dissatisfaction with Bolsonaro, accusing him of having allowed inflation to grow more than da Silva.

Lula da Silva

Public opinion toward da Silva seems mixed.

Positive

• Some commenters applaud actions taken under Lula da Silva's administration, specifically in relation to actions against organized crime.
• They reference the confiscation of over 3 billion reals from organized crime, and laud the efforts of President Lula and his government.
• Praise for his recent negotiations with Germany, which resulted in significant investment in a high-tech lab to combat pandemics.
• The government's Desenrola Brasil program, which aims to help citizens resolve their debts, is praised by some users who view it as a positive initiative from the Silva government.

Negative

• Criticism for indirectly contributing to Bolsonaro's rise to power and accuse him of involvement in various frauds.
• Some call da Silva a thief and a criminal.
• Criticism for his comments comparing Israel's defense actions to genocide, with calls for balance from authorities.
• Some accuse him of supporting terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, while others defend him, stating that he would never support such groups.

SCOOP

The recent Congressional hearings on antisemitism in Ivy League schools, specifically focusing on Representative Elise Stefanik's questioning, have sparked intense online discussions. The sentiment surrounding Stefanik's stance on Israel and her inquiries into antisemitism varies widely. Despite the polarization, a notable theme emerges from the conversations: a growing belief among many Americans that Ivy League institutions are not doing enough to curb hateful rhetoric on their campuses.

Key Themes Of Discussion

Support for Stefanik's Questioning:

Many online commentators expressed appreciation for Stefanik's pointed questions during the Congressional hearings. Some thanked her for bringing attention to the issue of antisemitism and criticized Harvard for what they perceived as a failure to condemn hateful rhetoric. Stefanik's inquiries about calls for the destruction of Israel were seen as necessary to address concerns about the university's code of conduct.

<figure class="image image_resized" style="width:75%;"

Criticism of Stefanik

On the flip side, there were criticisms of Stefanik, with some questioning her approach. Detractors accused her of conflating legitimate criticism of Israeli policies with antisemitism and argued that her definition of antisemitic behavior was overly broad. Some even suggested that Stefanik was using the situation for political gain, aligning herself with former President Trump.

Debate Over Free Speech:

The discussions also delved into the broader debate over free speech on college campuses. Some users argued that universities should focus on educating individuals making antisemitic statements rather than outright punishment. Others contended that certain forms of speech, particularly those inciting hatred or violence, should not be protected under the banner of free speech.

<figure class="image image_resized" style="width:75%;"

Concerns About Academic Institutions:

A recurrent theme in the discussions was the criticism directed at Ivy League institutions and academia. Some users accused these institutions of fostering antisemitism and failing to protect Jewish students adequately. This criticism extended to the perceived evasiveness of academic responses, contrasting them unfavorably with the perspectives of "ordinary" working people.

There are varied opinions towards defunding Ivy League institutions altogether. The majority of the posts do not explicitly advocate for defunding, but they do express disappointment and concern about how these institutions are handling issues of antisemitism and so-called "woke" ideologies. There are calls for the resignation of university presidents and criticism of their responses to the Congressional hearings.

Conclusion

While online discussions on antisemitism in Ivy League schools are diverse and often polarized, a common thread emerged – a growing perception among many Americans that Ivy League institutions are falling short in addressing and preventing hateful rhetoric. We saw a rise in both positive and negative comments for Stefanik on topics like “Israel” and “Ideologies,” while support for “universities” experienced a dip the day of the hearing and the day after.

The hearings, particularly Stefanik's questioning, have brought to light the complexities of the issue, reflecting broader debates on free speech, political motivations, and the role of academic institutions in shaping societal values. The calls for increased accountability and efforts to confront antisemitism on campuses suggest a need for continued dialogue and action in the pursuit of tolerance and understanding.

Scoop

Governor Gavin Newsom’s public opinion has dropped after outrage over San Francisco’s overnight clean up for foreign dignitaries arriving for last week’s APEC Summit.

The Details

• Ahead of the summit, San Francisco authorities dismantled homeless encampments downtown, scrubbed away graffiti, and installed murals and decorative crosswalks to spruce up high-traffic zones.
• Newsom acknowledged the summit motivated the city to "raise the bar" on cleaning efforts.

What they’re saying

The Governor quipped to reporters 'I know folks are saying, 'Oh, they're just cleaning up this place because all those fancy leaders are coming to town,' said Newsom late last week.

'That's true, because it's true - but it's also true for months and months and months prior to APEC, we've been having conversations.'

"He was more concerned with promoting...his policies instead of addressing the human suffering on our streets," said Jennifer Friedenbach of the Coalition on Homelessness.

Conservative Pundit Megyn Kelly derided the Governor’s priorities, “Gavin Newsom and Mayor Breed clean up the city just in time for the Chinese leader to show up there with Joe Biden...They’re important, but the actual residents of San Francisco can pound sand,' Kelly said on her podcast.

Movement

• As media focused on the pre-summit clean up and Newsom’s comments acknowledging the clean up, Newsom has earned consistently lower daily opinion scores.
  • In the first half of the last 30 days, Newsom’s daily opinion scores only fell below 45% once.
  • Since November 9th, Newsom's daily public opinion scores have only topped 45% once, mostly lingering between 43-44% on most days.
  • Despite touting negotiation wins with China on fentanyl and carbon emissions, opinion amongst users discussing Newsom online tumbled further on the first day of the Summit, dropping from 44% on November 15th to 39% on November 16th.
    • This was the lowest daily opinion score for Newsom in the last 30 days.

Lasting Impression

The California Governor continues to be attacked for the clean up fiasco, finding himself in first place amongst major politicians who earn more negative than positive comments online.

Looking ahead

As speculation grows over a future Newsom presidential bid, the spotlight on California’s homelessness crisis seems unlikely to dim, posing a significant political challenge to the California Governor’s political ambition.

The Big Picture

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sees a boost in Iowa after landing a coveted endorsement from Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds this week, but he still faces a towering challenge from Donald Trump in the state's critical caucus.

The Details

• Reynolds, who holds an 81% approval rating in Iowa, heaped praise on DeSantis at a GOP event near Des Moines. “He fought for parents’ rights in schools, implemented the toughest abortion restrictions in the country, and brought law and order back to the Sunshine State,” she said.
• Former President Trump got early wind of the endorsement, writing on Truth Social the day before Reynolds’ endorsement, “If and when Kim Reynolds of Iowa endorses Ron DeSanctimonious, who is absolutely dying in the polls both in Iowa and Nationwide, it will be the end of her political career in that MAGA would never support her again, just as MAGA will never support DeSanctimonious again.”
• Trump won the 2016 and 2020 Iowa caucuses, but Reynolds’ endorsement may lead to a tightening race shaping up in 2024 between Trump and DeSantis.

Highly Unusual

• Reynolds endorsement is a serious break from Iowa caucus norms-Iowa governors have historically stayed neutral in the caucus and avoided endorsing candidates.

Movement

A new report from Media Intelligence Group, which employs state-of-the-art artificial intelligence to monitor and database the support and sentiment of candidates, finds that DeSantis has already seen a boost in Iowa after Reynolds’ endorsement.

• Analyzing online discussions of GOP primary candidates in Iowa, MIG’s report averaged positive and negative comments to determine support for all candidates and found that DeSantis doubled his support amongst Iowans this week.
• Iowans are well aware of Reynold’s decision to throw support behind the Florida Governor, with “endorsement” being the most frequently discussed topic amongst Iowans discussing the Presidential candidates remaining-ahead of other issues like race relations and abortion.
• While DeSantis likely benefited from a strong debate performance as well, DeSantis began trending upward prior to the debate.
• The day of Reynold’s endorsement, DeSantis climbed from 16% support on Sunday, November 5th, to 25% support on Monday September 6th.
• As of Friday, November 10th, DeSantis currently holds 31% support amongst Iowans discussing GOP candidates online.

Yes, but...

Trump still remains ahead in MIG’s report and other Iowa polls. Trump holds 47% support according to MIG’s report-a 16% gap DeSantis will have to close before the January 15th Iowa Caucus.

Between the Lines

The Reynolds endorsement may matter most for DeSantis' battle with Nikki Haley for second place.

• The former UN ambassador was the center of much attention at the GOP’s Wednesday Debate in Miami as she and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy traded emotionally charged blows.
• However, MIG’s report found only a 3% bump for Haley in Iowa support, from 6% to 9%, post debate.

With the holiday shopping season approaching, consumers appear conflicted about risking their usual shopping plans amid rising crime rates nationwide.  

What the Data Says 

Media Intelligence Group reports that public discussions reveal an emerging apprehension and caution regarding shopping dangers. 

• Reports of increased theft and organized retail crime in many major cities have been generating headlines all year.  
• Various reports also revealed that retailers lost more than $112 billion in 2022 due to crime.  
• Major brands like Target, Walmart, Nordstrom, Macy's, and others have closed store locations because of increasing theft. 

Now, the danger of in-store criminal activity has people expressing their hesitation to shop during what has traditionally been the heaviest shopping season of the year.  

• Some people argue that positive economic indicators like 2.0% and 2.1% GDP growth in Q1 and Q1 of 2023 point to a hospitable environment for spending.  
• However, concerns also persist about inflation's toll on families’ spending power, making purchases challenging. 

What Americans are Saying 

The MIG report suggests caution rather than fear is the prevailing mood among Americans.  

• Shoppers seem alert to potential dangers but not fully deterred.  
• Many do say they’ll think twice before venturing out or spend less time browsing in stores. 
• Meanwhile corporations seem quiet in the public forum but are likely keeping a close eye on shrinking revenues. 
• People are hesitant due to increased risks of theft and organized retail crime. 
• Some express fear about potential mass shootings in places like malls and shopping centers. 
• And most Americans feel uncertain about the overall economy affecting their spending power. 

Media Denial 

At the same time, many media outlets push back on the narrative that retail crime is significantly increasing nationwide based on available data.  

• Many headlines suggest that retailers may be overstating or sensationalizing the issue.  
• Some journalists express a desire for “more objective” data collection on retail crime trends before concluding there is a major national surge occurring. 
• Despite media pushback, these pressures may cause retailers to see decreased profits through the end of 2023. 

Louisiana Representative Mike Johnson emerged from obscurity last week, rising to Speaker of the House at a critical junction for Conservatives and America as a whole. Johnson faces his first test as Speaker, grappling with the decision of whether to prioritize the calls of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Republican Senators alike for joint Israel-Ukraine aid or the Conservative Grassroots’ demand to prioritize domestic crises, as America faces record-breaking surges in illegal migrant encounters and rising overdose rates. With a solid grounding in conservative principles and an unapologetic commitment to his faith-driven worldview, Johnson’s career has been the embodiment of the ongoing battle between everyday Conservatives and the entrenched elites of D.C. Hailing from Shreveport, Mike Johnson is no stranger to swamps, but now this modern-day Cajun David will be put to his first major test as he takes on the Goliath that is the Washington Establishment.

Mike Johnson was little known to much of America prior to his election as Speaker. A new report from Media Intelligence Group, which employs state-of-the-art artificial intelligence technology to monitor online discussions surrounding politicians and political issues, found that prior to his election, Johnson was hardly discussed by social media users. In fact, in all of September, just 820 users nationally mentioned Johnson online. That all changed when Johnson rose to be elected the 56th Speaker of the House. On October 25th alone, Johnson’s online mentions exploded to 6,056, and he ended October with 16,335 total user mentions.

Johnson’s first week as Speaker quickly disappointed the D.C. establishment. Johnson has gone directly against the Senate’s plea to couple Israel and Ukraine aid into one single package. Instead, Johnson opted to cut Ukraine aid from Israel aid and made funding for Israel aid contingent on a $14 billion cut in IRS funding from Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. Both separating Ukraine aid and IRS
cuts immediately met resistance from Senate Democrats and Republicans alike. “That’s a poison pill and non-starter. It’s just not the way we’re going to proceed,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Ben Cardin (MD-D) told Politico. Furthermore, Republican Senator Mitt Romney voiced his opposition, “If we're going to have a piece of legislation that actually becomes law, it’s going to include support for Ukraine, as well as Israel..." adding, "Reducing the IRS doesn't make a lot of sense to me."

Johnson’s play to make Israel Aid stand-alone hasn’t been as unpopular with Americans as it has been in the Senate. MIG’s report found that Mike Johnson’s overall average sentiment score, an average of all positive and negative social media comments made towards Johnson to date, has remained high at 49% since announcing the stand alone Israel package. His daily sentiment score, an average of all positive and negative social media comments in a 24 hour window, has also been strong, remaining at or just below 50% each day over the last 7 days. These sentiment scores are considered high for prominent elected officials. For example, President Joe Biden has a 44% overall average sentiment and has not surpassed 45% daily sentiment once in the last 60 days. Despite increased scrutiny on both Johnson’s policy record and personal life since assuming the Speakership, Johnson has maintained both his 49% overall average sentiment and his short-term daily sentiment at elevated levels compared to peers like Biden.

With less than a month until a government shutdown, Speaker Johnson faces both honoring conservative commitments and the dueling priorities between the House and Senate as he fights to deliver Israel aid in its war against Hamas. Johnson’s ability to mobilize House Conservatives in favor of this package will be no small feat, nor will the coming stare down between the House and Senate in reconciling their clashing priorities. Johnson’s success or failure in navigating the choppy political waters in the coming weeks will set the tone for his Speakership. Yet with the latest Israel bill introduced by Johnson, and steadfast conservative principles and faith as his guide, Johnson appears unwavering in the face of the Goliath that is the Washington Establishment.

As conflict broke out in early October between Israel and Hamas, Black Lives Matter also found itself in the spotlight. The left-wing activist group generated severe backlash and negativity over its public expressions of solidarity with Hamas, which it ostensibly walked back by deleting some X posts.

According to a report from Media Intelligence Group (MIG), online sentiment toward Black Lives Matter has become increasingly polarized following the organization's controversial remarks. While BLM supporters argue that opposing oppression should be a universal cause, a vast majority of Israel supporters see the comments as anti-Semitic and promoting terrorism.

The MIG report revealed that Black Lives Matter quickly became a top discussion subject online following its statements. During the second week of October, there were more than 9,000 people engaging in online debate about the movement daily.

Sentiment also dropped from 45% positive to 37% in the same week as ideological divisions grew more apparent. Since mid-October, discussion of BLM online has subsided but sentiment overall for leftist ideologies remains in the low 40% range.

Recent discoveries of financial mismanagement in BLM chapters have also fueled negative perceptions. The alleged BLM-linked murder of an Antifa activist has further stirred controversy about violence associated with the movement.

Overall, Black Lives Matter's vocal alignment with Hamas has made it a lightning rod issue, costing it support and retaining only vehement supporters. The complex public response reflects the overall contentious ideological debates sparked by the Israel-Hamas conflict.

A recent Media Intelligence Group (MIG) report on public sentiment regarding the US economy reveals a nation split along partisan lines. Supporters praise the administration for allegedly reducing unemployment and achieving GDP growth. But critics blame Biden for rising inflation and interest rates that threaten the middle class.

One sentiment that crosses the political divide is that many people feel their financial situations are becoming strained in the current economy. The report highlights Americans worries about the impact of continuously climbing interest rates on mortgages and car loans.

Today auto loan defaults are surging, and mortgage rates hover around 7.5%. Households are struggling with the higher threshold for borrowing. Despite the administration touting positive economic indicators like a 4.9% GDP growth in Q3 2022, many of the voting population still express fear and uncertainty. MIG data shows that Joe Biden's approval rating dropped to a concerning 35% during the second week of October.

Biden critics point to inflation reducing real incomes and an accumulating public debt burden as indicators of economic mismanagement. But Biden supporters credit policies like the Inflation Reduction Act for spurring investment and job creation. In general, sentiment appears aligned with political affiliations but the overall sentiment towards the economy in 2023 is negative.