The House voted to pass a recent TikTok bill potentially banning the social media platform in the U.S., and conversations sparked online. While more Republicans than Democrats voted to pass the bill, conversations suggest divisions among voters are not strictly partisan. As more information comes out about the legislation, opinions are shaping across age demographics as well as political parties.

Younger Millennials and Gen Z Voters

Voters under 30 are expressing significant concern about the TikTok bill. They mostly view it as a potential threat to freedom of speech and privacy. They argue that it opens the door for governmental control over social media and news outlets.

Some people are suggesting rules in the bill may set the stage for abuse by future presidents, opening the door for more unchecked censorship. They fear the bill may allow executive actions to ban any sites, not just TikTok, that a president finds objectionable.

Many young people are also questioning the motives behind the bill, suspecting the involvement of competing platforms like Facebook.

There are some younger voters who see the bill as a necessary measure to protect national security. But because younger people compose the largest userbase for platforms like TikTok, support for the bill seems limited in this demographic.

Young people often use TikTok and similar platforms for entertainment and as a tool for political activism and social justice movements. They largely argue the bill infringes on their freedom of expression and could potentially stifle youth-led movements and revenue streams.

Opposition to the bill seems to cross political lines since most younger voters are pro-technology and social media. Many right-leaning voters say that, although they are concerned about China spyware, the bill likely won’t accomplish its alleged aim.

This group has also shown interest in the stock market and cryptocurrency trading, with some referencing "TRUMP/SOL" on DEX Screener and others discussing trading cards and "Trump bucks." They also point out the hypocrisy in banning TikTok for data privacy issues while American tech companies are also known for collecting extensive user data.

Middle-Age Voters Are Cautiously Supportive

For the middle-aged demographic, reactions to the bill are more varied. This group is less likely to use TikTok, and their views tend to reflect their political leanings. Some agree with the bill, citing concerns over national security, privacy, and the influence of foreign companies.

There is certainly opposition, however, with some seeing the bill as an unnecessary restriction on a platform that provides an outlet for creativity and communication.

Many voters in the 35-50 demographic show cautious support for the bill. They emphasize the importance of restricting the Chinese Communist Party from accessing American data. They also point out that TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, is subject to Chinese law, which can compel companies to cooperate with intelligence services.

This group seems to worry about misuse of data both by foreign governments and American corporations. Many of them call for stricter regulations to protect user data in general. They express skepticism about the effectiveness of the bill in addressing digital spying, arguing for a more comprehensive approach to data protection.

Older Voters Are Primarily Concerned with Security

Voters older than 50, particularly those in the Boomer generation, largely support the bill. This demographic tends to be less familiar with TikTok and often views it mainly as a national security concern and cultural negative.

There are a few voices in favor of TikTok, espousing the benefits of the platform for their children or grandchildren. However, this group seems to be smaller than among other age groups.

Older voters who identify as conservatives or Trump supporters often view the bill as a necessary step to counter foreign influence and protect national security. Many of them view restricting biased platforms like TikTok as part of a larger battle against woke culture and left-leaning ideologies. A segment of this group is hopeful the bill can be utilized to counter restrictions and throttling against conservative voices on social media platforms.

However, not all Trump supporters are in favor of the bill. Some fear that it could lead to more extensive government control and censorship, potentially infringing on First Amendment rights. They argue that such decisions should be made by the public rather than the government.

Older Democrats express more skepticism about the bill. They view it as a potential tool for censorship and control, with some alleging that it could be used to manipulate the information landscape to the benefit of Trump or other conservative figures.

While the bill still needs to gain support in the Senate, it seems to be losing steam among voters. There are still supporters, but discourse seems to be largely negative, regardless of political affiliation.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer received vocal negative responses following his comments about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Many voters did not approve of his call for new elections in Israel.

Schumer claimed that Netanyahu's government no longer fits the needs of Israel after the events of October 7 and has been too willing to tolerate the civilian toll in Gaza. He also compared Netanyahu to Putin and labeled him as an obstacle to peace.

Many people, including voters and other politicians, are criticizing Schumer for his remarks, saying he was unjustified in his rhetoric.

• Following his comments, discussion about Schumer online increased as his approval decreased.
• In the last two days, discussion about Schumer rose significantly from his average volume to nearly 2000 mentions.
• With the increase in discussion, Schumer’s overall approval also dropped, reaching 43% on the day of his Israel comments.
• Schumer’s support regarding Israel dropped slightly after his comments, while support regarding Palestine slightly increased.

Top Issues Decreasing Schumer’s Support

MIG Reports analysis shows the top influencing factors pushing Schumer’s approval down are related to Israel:

1. The first and most glaring issue causing support for Chuck Schumer to drop is his call for new elections in Israel. He has received considerable backlash for his interference in Israeli politics.
2. Schumer's public criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu has also been a divisive issue. While some agree with Schumer that Netanyahu's government is "stuck in the past," others see this as an unjustified attack.
3. Many critics accuse Schumer of siding with Hamas, a terrorist organization, over U.S. ally Israel.
4. Schumer is losing support for the perception of prioritizing partisan politics over the welfare of American hostages held by Hamas. People argue he should focus on securing their release, rather than calling for new elections in Israel.
5. Some accuse Schumer, who is Jewish, of betraying Israel and the Jewish community with his comments, saying his actions have shown him to be a poor "Guardian of Israel."

Overall, Schumer seems to be losing support among pro-Israel Democrats and much of the Jewish community. There are, however, some who support his comments.

Pro-Palestine Progressives Praise Schumer

A segment of progressive Democrats agreed with Schumer, stating that the Israeli government under Netanyahu has indeed lost its way and has become a pariah state. They also concurred with Schumer's suggestion that the war with Hamas has created a significant political issue for the Democrat Party, potentially costing them in the next election.

A few also applauded Schumer's call for a "fresh debate about the future of Israel" and his insistence on a future two-state solution. His remarks have been described as "remarkable," with praise for Schumer's assertion that Netanyahu's coalition "no longer fits the needs of Israel."

Progressive supporters argue that it's possible to support the Palestinians without supporting Hamas and to support Israel without supporting Netanyahu's government.

Israel Supporters Express Shock at Schumer’s Rhetoric

Many on the right and some of Schumer’s more moderate Democrat constituents vehemently disagree with his remarks about Israel. They say it was inappropriate and out of place for an American leader to involve himself in Israeli politics. For instance, Speaker Johnson called Schumer's comments, "highly inappropriate" and "plain wrong."

Schumer is receiving blowback for what many perceive as interference in Israel's internal affairs. Many say American politicians should let Israel and its people decide their own leadership. Some also suggested that Schumer's comments were primarily aimed at securing support from constituents who are in favor of Palestine.

There are comments labeling Schumer a "fake Jew" and saying honest Jewish people would not make such objectionable and interfering comments. Some voters even suggested a special vote in New York to remove Schumer from his position.

Overall, Schumer’s support seemed to dip because of the comments, highlighting the Democrat split over Israel or Palestine support, which MIG Reports has previously analyzed. Other politicians like John Fetterman have been criticized by the progressive wing of the Democrat Party. Many who were outraged at Schumer’s language accuse him of pandering to the Hamas wing of the Democrat Party.

Americans seem doubtful that February’s CPI report claiming 3.2% inflation accurately captures the rising costs they face day-to-day. Many voters say the real cost of living is much higher than what the CPI suggests. They cite increasing prices in housing, healthcare, food, and education, which they feel aren't accurately reflected in the index.

Pain Points for Everyday Citizens

Despite Democrats historically being vocal against the wealthy class gaining unfair advantages, this sentiment is now growing among all Americans. More voters identify the political class as among the “wealthy” and see elites as the primary beneficiaries of the current tax system.

• Republicans tend to be very negative on the current state of the economy, pointing to life during the Trump era as more affordable.
• Sentiment towards Trump on inflation is slightly higher than sentiment towards Biden among all voters.
• Trump averaged 47% support on inflation over the last week compared to Biden’s average of 44%.

• In swing states, Trump also maintained a 47% average approval on inflation to Biden’s 44% and an overall sentiment of 43%.

While most voters admit that costs have increased across the board, there are particular areas they say they’re feeling economic pain.

The cost of housing is a common complaint for all Americans – gaining bipartisan discontent. People would like to return to pre-COVID housing affordability. They point to the idea that there should be a 41% drop in home prices and a 69% increase in incomes to reach previous affordability levels.

Food prices are another subject of concern. Many online are skeptical of Biden administration promises to lower them. For both food and housing, there seems to be a common perception that times were “better” or “easier” during the Trump administration.

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that inflation has risen significantly in the last four years, still not coming down to the target rate of 2%.
• The cost of cars, housing, and food are also shockingly high in the last several years.

What Americans Say is Causing Inflation

A common sentiment among left-leaning voters is that corporations and the wealthy are not paying their fair share of taxes. The Biden administration has recently been claiming that “shrinkflation” unfairly perpetrated by corporations is to blame for American dollars barely putting food on the table. Many Democrat voters seems to sympathize with this explanation – although most are still extremely unhappy with the reality of rising costs.

Biden supporters tend to argue that tax burdens are shifted onto the middle and lower classes, thereby increasing their cost of living. Some are also vocal in the belief that immigrants contribute significantly to the economy through taxes, contradicting the stereotype that they're a drain on resources.

Right-leaning voters frequently criticize the government for excessive spending. They argue spending is a bigger cause of higher taxes and increased cost of living for citizens. They believe taxes should be cut and government spending should be severely curbed.

Unlike some vocal progressive voters, most Republicans and some moderates believe that illegal immigrants are an unacceptable cost to the U.S. economy and the average taxpayer. They point to housing, food, and other services provided to illegal immigrants as unwanted and unauthorized by voters.

Taxes and inflation are among the top issues Democrats and Republicans discuss as important. Sentiment on the economy is slightly higher among democrats, but they discuss it more, with Republicans placing more emphasis on border security.

Regardless of political affiliation, voters seem to agree the cost of living has noticeably risen and many struggle to make ends meet. There’s a general sentiment often attributing financial difficulties to low wages and high taxes.

Americans Blame the Government for These Difficult Times

Many voters reiterate their belief that spending money on people who don't generate income or pay taxes – like illegal immigrants – is not a feasible solution to American economic pain. They argue for a system where people who make money and employ others keep more of their earnings, allowing them to invest, hire, and thereby stimulate the economy. These voters blame rampant spending on the government, resisting calls for higher tax revenue to ease economic burdens.

There is a recurring belief that the government's actions, such as printing money, are contributing to the devaluation of the currency, which in turn leads to inflation. Many voters also attribute high inflation to President Biden's policies and actions.

The social media commentary on Robert Hur's testimony shows a division between those who believe Hur's findings are legitimate and those who contest them. Many Accuse Hur of lying in his report and say the testimony backfired for Republicans. Others insist his investigation was thorough and independent, identifying evidence of misconduct by Joe Biden.

Many of the comments specifically focus on the claim that Joe Biden willfully retained classified materials after the end of his vice presidency, an illegal act. However, others express skepticism about the findings, stating that Hur's conclusions were influenced by his political affiliations or personal bias.

While many target Robert Hur and his conduct directly, it seems Democrats are largely heading an effort to pivot to broader political commentary. This includes their views on the state of American democracy, the character of Donald Trump, and the behavior of various political figures.

A lot of outspoken Democrats are taking the opportunity to characterize Trump as a dictator and express fears about the future of democracy. Others defend Trump, bringing Biden back into the spotlight as an example of a two-tiered justice system.

Role of Robert Hur

A widely discussed topic is the role of Robert Hur himself. Some people express appreciation for his work and his testimony. Others criticize him for being politicized, expressing their desire to see charges against Trump.

Counterpoints suggest that Hur's investigation was thorough and fair, and that the decision not to charge Biden was justified based on the evidence.

The Trump Administration

Many discussions pivot to allegations against the Trump administration, including racism, fascism, and criminal activity.

Counterpoints include claims that these allegations are politically motivated and lack substantiation.

Democracy vs. Tyranny

A major theme in the discussion is the choice between democracy and tyranny, with some suggesting that supporting Trump is equivalent to supporting tyranny.

Counterpoints argue that such comments are hyperbolic and overlook the democratic processes that underpin the American system of government.

House Democrats Performance

There is a debate about the performance of House Democrats during Hur's testimony. Some praise their questioning and efforts to uncover the truth, while others, like law professor Jonathan Turley, criticize them for their approach.

Counterpoints suggest that the Democrats' performance was strategic and necessary given the gravity of the allegations.

Trump's Cognitive Decline

Some people discuss a video montage put together by Representative Jerry Nadler, which they claim shows Trump's cognitive decline.

Counterpoints argue that this is a personal attack and irrelevant to the substance of Hur's testimony.

There is no clear evidence that people are equating Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton's handling of classified material to charges brought against Trump for similar violations. The conversation surrounding Hur’s testimony primarily focuses on Donald Trump and his actions during and after his presidency. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton are not frequently mentioned, indicating that the conversation, at least on social media, is not drawing parallels between these political figures in relation to handling classified material.

Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman is facing backlash from progressive voters over his support for Israel. Among other issues causing his Democrat base alarm, some are claiming he has veered too far to the right to maintain their support. MIG Reports analysis shows a significant split in his support base, reflecting the Party’s larger internal battle over the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Voters Angry at Israel Support by Party Representatives

A very vocal portion of progressive Democrat voters are increasingly critical of Senator Fetterman's stance on Israel and Hamas. They argue Israel's response to Hamas has been disproportionate and amounts to genocide. These critics loudly oppose Fetterman’s comments supporting Israel and accuse him of being complicit in what they view as genocide. They regularly challenge the view that Hamas is solely to blame for the conflict.

Pro-Palestine Democrats argue that Israel's actions violate the International Court of Justice and believe Fetterman supports these violations. Some accuse Fetterman of promoting propaganda and misinformation, further deepening their disapproval of his position on the issue. They argue that Israel has killed more civilians in a short period than Hamas has in history.

There is a sense of disappointment in Fetterman, indicating Democrat voters had previously supported him but have been turned off by his views on the Israel-Palestine conflict. Pro-Palestine advocates are expressing severe dissatisfaction with any Democrats who support Israel, and many are suggesting that Fetterman's stance is a deal-breaker for them.

Internal Disagreement with Pro-Israel Voters

The growing division and dwindling support for Fetterman is reflective of a larger crack in the Democrat Party. MIG Reports has previously reported the old-school and new-school split between Israel supporters and radical Palestine supporters.

The Democrat voters who still express support for Fetterman's position argue that Israel has a right to defend itself against Hamas, which they label as a terrorist organization. They appreciate his stance on Israel, viewing it as a necessary ally in the Middle East.

Often older or more traditional Democrats, this group believes Fetterman is making morally correct choices by supporting Israel. They also commend Fetterman for his continuous support for Israel, appreciating his perspective that Hamas is not only a threat to Israel but to the entire Middle East.

However, support numbers for Fetterman suggest that the pro-Palestine segment of Democrat voters may be winning out.

• In the last two weeks, support for Fetterman among Democrat voters has swung wildly, trending down.
• Overall support dipped to a 14-day low of 40% and a high of 55%.
• Fetterman’s support regarding Israel-Palestine issues dropped to a low of 35%, sitting at 37% on March 11.
• The most recent support dip comes with increased discussion of the Senator, suggesting growing displeasure.

Other Reasons Democrats are Unhappy with Fetterman

While the Israel-Palestine issues seems to be the most significant complaint his voters have, Fetterman is also losing support for other issues:

• Fetterman's criticisms of the President have led to significant backlash from some Democrat voters. They believe he's inadvertently helping Trump and weakening the Party.
• Democrat voters perceive Fetterman as not being a true progressive. They accuse him of deceiving the people of Pennsylvania by pretending to be a progressive when he's increasingly siding with the right.
• Fetterman's "tough guy" bit is not resonating well with some Democrat voters. They believe his nonchalant attitude when discussing vital issues is disconcerting, including the way he dresses and speaks.
• His associations with controversial figures like Nina Turner and Kyrsten Sinema have also caused a split in his support.
• There are complaints of "tokenized gay people" on Fetterman's staff, suggesting Democrats feel Fetterman is using these individuals as a shield or for political gain.

Comments like, "This seemed just like much of your drift to the right," indicate there may be a broader perception that Fetterman is moving away from his party's core values. This could potentially worsen a split among Democrats if these perceptions continue to proliferate.

Fetterman’s accused drift towards more conservative positions pose a problem that seems to be facing many Democrats. The most outspoken progressive activists are protesting and making demands – most frequently about a ceasefire in Gaza – but Democrats may also be losing ground with the majority of Americans on issues like the border and the economy.

At last week’s State of the Union address, President Biden continued efforts made by Democrats in recent years to position the Democratic Party as the Party of the working class, taking on the rich and corporations. “Look, I’m a capitalist,” Biden remarked. “If you want to make or can make a million or millions of bucks, that’s great. Just pay your fair share in taxes.”

Taking on the wealthy represents a pivot from the era of Bill Clinton Democrats, whose Clinton ads of the day now sound more like modern Republicans. Clinton told viewers in a televised ad during his first bid for office, “Our government has failed us. And one of its worst failures has been welfare. I have a plan to end welfare as we know it.”

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has been on the forefront of pushing Democrats to the modern “Eat the Rich” Party brand. But despite Biden and Warren’s confidence in their appeal to middle class voters, online discussions surrounding Warren’s rhetoric on raising taxes does not just land on deaf ears, it enrages distrustful Americans who increasingly believe Democrats are the party of the elites.

What They’re Saying

Normally, Warren’s tweets garner around a hundred responses, but Warren’s tweet praising efforts to unleash the IRS on the “Ultra Rich” earned more than 5,000 responses. 

MIG Reports’ analysis of responses to the tweet uncovered a combination of distrust and mockery. People expressed a “perception of hypocrisy,” with a number of users criticizing Warren for her personal wealth, suggesting she should be taxed more heavily or accusing her of not paying her fair share.

The theme of distrust and of hypocrisy extended beyond Warren, with many responses to Warren’s tweet lowering Warren's sentiment by associating her with other controversial figures such as Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. This discourse highlighted how the President’s own son pleaded guilty to tax evasion.

Others responding to the Massachusetts Senator’s tweet asserted that the level of tax revenue is not the problem, but government spending. Voters mentioned Warren “arguing that the focus should be on reducing spending rather than increasing taxes.” 

By the Numbers

Since Warren’s comments on raising taxes, MIG Reports finds a serious blow to her approval among those discussing her online. Warren tends to hover below 250 mentions online. This earns her a near neutral approval rating on days when she has low online discussion volume.

• On the day Warren tweeted calling for higher taxes, her mentions doubled their usual rate, and her approval rating fell.
• On March 10th, Warren's approval rating was 47%. The day of her tax comments, approval tumbled to 43% and fell to 41% by March 12th.

It’s clear there is a direct correlation between Warren’s tax-the-rich rhetoric and her drop in approval. Warren’s ratio of positive to negative comments in discussions involving economics showed a ratio of 25 positive percentage points to 85 negative percentage points.

A Historic Shift

Perhaps the best explanation for why efforts from Democrats like Warren and Biden increasingly fall on deaf ears is found in the partisan wealth divide in elections. In 2016, Pew Research found that, “Although many middle-class areas voted for Barack Obama in 2008, they overwhelmingly favored Donald Trump in 2016.”

This trend has continued since Trump’s rise in politics. Axios reported that, “64% of congressional districts with median incomes below the national median are now represented by Republicans.” Moreover, despite regularly labeling Republicans as the “Party of the Rich,” Democrats represent nine of the 10 richest Congressional Districts in America.

It's easy to understand why middle-class Americans simply don’t trust Democrats to hold elites accountable. Americans see politicians as part of the elite. Households across America are united in banning members of Congress from stock trading. Yet Democrat legislators continue to utilize insider information to make suspiciously successful stock trades, earning millions in a profession that pays $174,000 a year.

President Biden’s efforts to hold tax cheats accountable falls flat with Americans who have been following Hunter’s tax evasion charges. Rhetoric from Democrat politicians about taking on the rich or fixing the financial system doesn’t seem to be convincing working-class Americans to forget that Democrats are often among the "Ultra-Rich” they decry.

To many Americans, Democrats both act and speak like the elite class they claim to hold accountable. Online discussions suggest middle-class Americans can hardly distinguish DNC talking points from the elites they felt mocked them for not being able to “just work from home” during COVID. Many normal Americans feel attacked when the rich, politicians, or media commentators tell them to simply buy a $50,000 electric car to save the planet. Republicans will likely continue to win middle class America, a crucial segment of the electorate, if Democrats continue to act and talk like the people Americans feel detest them.

Societal decline in America seems to be a growing sentiment among many demographics, albeit distinct in the reasoning. These discussions are often heated and divisive, reflecting the polarized state of American politics. Fracturing of political leadership, societal norms, economic stability, and the justice system all contribute to a perception that society is decaying.

While many agree that America may be declining, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, as well as other demographic groups such as race, age, and economic class, attribute different causes.

Political Viewpoints

Republicans are generally more concerned about societal decline, often attributing it to what they perceive as a breakdown in traditional values and an erosion of law and order. They tend to view societal problems such as crime, drug abuse, and family breakdown as symptoms of moral decay. Some Republicans also blame societal decline on liberal policies like welfare programs and lenient immigration laws, which they believe incentivize dependency and discourage individual responsibility.

Democrats often argue that societal decline is due to systemic problems such as inequality, discrimination, and a lack of access to quality education and healthcare. They tend to focus on societal structures and institutions, arguing that changes in these areas can help alleviate societal decline. Some Democrats also point to the influence of big corporations and the wealthy, arguing that they have too much power and that this contributes to societal decline. There are mixed views about President Joe Biden's impact on these systemic problems. Some Democrats believe he has initiated improvements, while others feel he has not done enough.

Independents express frustration with the polarized state of politics and the inability of politicians to work together to solve societal problems. They often call for pragmatic solutions and a focus on common ground. Their views on societal decline are often shaped by specific issues of personal importance, such as the economy, social justice, or immigration.

Cultural and Economic Influences

Economic class is a crucial factor. Those in lower economic classes often attribute societal decline to economic inequality and lack of opportunity. Lower-income individuals express frustration towards the wealthy and corporations, believing they do not pay their fair share of taxes.

Middle-class individuals also express concerns about how their taxes are being used, with some feeling they are shouldering an unfair burden. Meanwhile, those in higher economic classes tend to be more optimistic about the state of society, although they also express concern about societal problems such as crime and drug abuse. Some higher-income individuals express dissatisfaction, often aimed at perceived government misuse of their taxes.

• Older individuals express concern about retirement funds and social security
• Younger individuals are more likely to discuss student loans and job prospects
• People of all races discuss instances of perceived unfairness in taxation and societal structure

When considering race, people of color are more likely to attribute societal decline to systemic racism and discrimination. Meanwhile, white Americans, particularly those in lower economic classes, often attribute societal decline to economic insecurity and cultural displacement.

Age also plays a role in these discussions. Older Americans, who have witnessed significant societal changes over their lifetimes, are often more concerned about societal decline. Younger Americans tend to be more optimistic about the future of society, although they often express frustration with current societal problems.

Recent trouble for certain regional banks has caused some Americans to express their concerns about how banking and interest rates are impacting the economy. A year ago Silicon Valley Banks collapsed, generating fears of another 2008-style financial crisis. This is mentioned today, along with huge losses for New York Community Bank as fearful discussions resume.

The general sentiment towards banks, especially those involved in political and economic decision making, appears to be driven by skepticism and concern.

The Fed and Potential Dollar Collapse

Some Americans express concern over increasing inflation, national debt, and the role that banks and politicians may play in exacerbating the situation. There are also mentions of alleged corruption involving politicians and their bank accounts.

There is also scattered talk about the Federal Reserve, with some Americans expressing doubts about its policies and actions in managing the economy. There are specific concerns about the potential for a U.S. dollar collapse and the role that the Federal Reserve may play in this. Some voters believe that the Federal Reserve and other banks are working together against the interests of small investors.

People concerned with the American financial system often mention Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve. Some praise his caution in monetary policy and his approach to interest rates. However, there is also significant criticism, accusing the Federal Reserve of being a private banking system that lies and works against the interest of the average person.

• Banking sentiment online hit a 30-day low of 46% on February 11.
• The 30-day high was 49% on February 26, with relatively high discussion just over 1,000.

Fear About Potential Bank Failures

There is also general concern about the stability of the world financial system. People speculate about the potential for more bank failures and the possibility of the dollar losing its status as world reserve currency. They mention the national debt and the potential for a dollar collapse, pointing to warnings from large institutions like Bank of America.

There's also discussion about inflationary challenges and disagreements about the best monetary policies to maintain stability. People appear to be aware of the complex global economic dynamics at play.

Discussion about potential bank failures often arises alongside concerns about the level of risk-taking by banks, the adequacy of their capital buffers, and the effectiveness of regulatory oversight.

Basel III

Online discussion also touches on banks' opposition to the higher capital requirements proposed in Basel III. Users claim that banks have spent a lot of money lobbying against these regulations.

There is a common thread in the conversation suggesting banks are using their financial power to manipulate politics and the market. Some mention Basel III to make the point that banks have spent a significant amount of money to bribe politicians in their favor regarding legislation. There seems to be a significant level of distrust and skepticism towards the banking sector and its role in shaping regulatory requirements.

Bitcoin Speculation with Increased Financial Skepticism

Many people also discuss the issue of "too big to fail" banks and record-low sentiment following the 2008 GFC. They discuss the moral hazards created by government bailouts for banks. More recently, the discussion has also focused on the potential effects of digital currencies like Bitcoin and fintech companies on the traditional banking system.

Amid Bitcoin hitting new all-time highs, some speculate that digital currencies are a solution that threatens traditional banks. Some also argue about the role of banks and financial institutions in the cryptocurrency market. They compare Bitcoin with traditional banking systems, stating that the latter is corrupt and benefits only large institutions.

There seems to be distrust in the current financial system and the Federal Reserve. These voters suggest the adoption of a CBDC might face resistance from those in the public aware of its implications. Some mention that corruption and money laundering within the banking sector could be mitigated by the transparency and traceability of digital currencies.

It’s not obvious whether political affiliation influences voter opinions about the U.S. banking and financial system. These discussions tend to be skeptical of both government and large corporations, which may be appealing to both right- and left-leaning voters.

While the segment of American voters involved in talk about banks and digital currencies is not overwhelmingly large, most Americans feel the squeeze of rising costs and the discussion is likely indicative of an underlying concern among those who are following current and potential conditions.

During the State of the Union, President Biden referred to the perpetrator of Laken Riley's murder as an "illegal immigrant." Numerous liberals promptly voiced their disapproval of Biden's choice of the term "illegal," contending that it is dehumanizing and reinforces detrimental stereotypes about immigrants.

This led the administration to initiate efforts to retract the use of the term, but it appears to have caused more harm than good.

The decision to backtrack on using the term "illegal" when referring to illegal immigrants has ignited a passionate and divided public response. The reactions on social media platforms showcase a polarization deeply rooted in political beliefs, with many expressing a sense of betrayal and disappointment. This has significantly contributed the the border security conversation over the last few days.

The conversation erupted after Biden's State of the Union on March 7th.

In response to Biden's backtracking, many Americans have expressed concerns.

Most dominantly, users accuse Biden of prioritizing the feelings of undocumented immigrants over the rights and safety of American citizens. The refusal to use the term "illegal alien" is viewed by this group as a form of disrespect towards victims of crimes committed by unauthorized immigrants.

A significant portion of social media users criticize Biden for not using the term "illegal aliens," emphasizing its legal and factual accuracy. This group contends that individuals who have violated U.S. immigration laws should be referred to as such, framing the issue as a matter of adherence to the rule of law.

Critics connect Biden's language choice to broader immigration policies, arguing that the administration's approach has led to increased unauthorized border crossings and crime. The use of softer language is seen by some as an attempt to divert attention from the challenges associated with immigration.

Many respondents express genuine concerns about safety, particularly regarding crimes committed by unauthorized immigrants. Specific cases, such as the tragic murder of Laken Riley, are cited as evidence of the dangers associated with illegal immigration, further fueling the negative sentiment.

A prevailing belief among critics is that Biden's language change is politically motivated, with accusations of the Democratic Party pandering to unauthorized immigrants for political gain. The decision to include unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. Census is cited as an example, adding to the perception of political maneuvering.

Another common thread in the responses is the criticism of what users perceive as an open border policy under the Biden administration. Critics argue that this policy contributes to an alleged increase in crime and other issues related to immigration.

The overwhelming sentiment on social media is one of frustration and disappointment. Biden’s misstep seems to have upset voters across the board with left-leaning voices decrying his use of “illegal” to begin with and right-leaning voters angered by his retraction. The negative backlash reflects a deep division on issues of immigration policy and national identity, with many demanding stronger borders and a more assertive approach from Biden to address the problems associated with illegal immigration.