MIG data is showing a deep polarization in views about Biden's health and his potential reelection. In many conversations, there's a subtext of worry over Biden’s cognitive abilities that spans all political views. However, it's often used as a talking point rather than an expression of concern for Biden's well-being.

Republicans tend to leverage Biden’s health to criticize his capability as a leader, Democrats downplay it to counteract Republican narratives, and Independents use it as part of broader discussions on policy and leadership.

Discussions About Whether Biden is Running the Country

While views about Biden’s cognitive fitness generally divide along party lines, there is a brewing discussion about whether he is the one making important decisions.

• Most supporters believe Biden is running the country effectively, citing his focus on climate change, infrastructure, and healthcare.
• They appreciate his calm demeanor and his effort to unite the country after a contentious and polarized period.

However, a significant number of Americans express skepticism about Biden's leadership. They question his mental and physical fitness, often pointing to his age and recurring verbal gaffes.

• Generally right leaning, this group implies that there might be others "pulling the strings," as they suggest that Biden cannot be fully in charge.
• Speculation about actual decision makers include the Democratic Party's more progressive members.
• Names are mentioned like Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Obama, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and The Squad, and various interest groups advocating for progressive causes.
• There is also a widespread belief among some circles that "woke" culture and corporations significantly influence Biden's policies.
• This sentiment is often expressed in discussions around issues such as race, gender, and social justice, with critics arguing that Biden is bending to the will of these progressive forces.
• Some theories suggest a shadowy, deep-state influence, implying that unknown entities might are controlling the presidency. But these theories are generally dismissed as misinformation.

It is noteworthy that these perspectives vary widely, often falling along partisan lines. Biden's supporters tend to view him as effectively running the country, while his critics are typically the ones who view his leadership skeptically.

Democrats Avoid Talking About Biden’s Cognitive Abilities

National Conversations

Democrats tend to be relatively quiet about about Biden's frequent gaffes and lack of unscripted public appearances. This suggests that Democrats may have unspoken concerns which they’re not willing to voice publicly.

• While Democrats sometimes acknowledge Biden’s coherence issues, they do not seem to view them as indicative of mental decline or as disqualifying for a potential reelection.
• Democrat commentary generally defends Biden, pointing to his achievements and dismissing criticisms of his mental health as unfounded.
• Due to the dismissiveness on the subject, one could infer that Democrats might be more supportive of Biden's policies and perhaps less likely to view his age or health as important.
• Democrats tend to argue that Biden has been an effective leader and deserves reelection.
• They rebut Republican accusations of mental decline by suggesting that these are politically motivated attacks.
• Some Democrats do express concern about the effectiveness of Biden's messaging, indicating that they believe he needs to do a better job of promoting his accomplishments.

Counter-Narratives About Trump’s Cognitive Abilities

In many discussions, Democrats argue that Trump’s mental state is equally questionable or even worse than Biden’s.

• Many refer to Trump's cognitive abilities negatively when Biden is brought up.
• They often recall instances during his presidency where his behavior or remarks were seen as erratic, unorthodox, or even authoritarian.

Swing State Democrats

In key states like Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and other swing states, Democrats generally align with national party sentiment, although there is more noticeable concern.

• National approval for Biden has averaged 49% in the last 30 days, while approval in swing states averaged 44%.

• Some swing state voters argue that Biden’s potential cognitive decline is being exaggerated or manipulated for political gain.
• There is noticeable dismissal when concerns are brought up, mirroring the national conversation.
• Many swing state Democrats do not directly mention Biden's health or potential mental decline.
• Lack of discussion may be due to an overshadowing anti-Trump sentiment within the party.
• However, there are some Democrats voicing concern about Biden's potential cognitive decline, arguing that it could harm the party's chances in future elections.
• A large segment of swing state Democrats seem to take issue with Republican narratives, but will not explicitly defend Biden's cognitive abilities.
• There is a clear divide among swing state Democrats about a potential Biden second term, with some expressing strong support and others voicing doubts.

Republicans View Biden as Clearly in Decline

National Conversations

Overall, Republicans tend to be most vocal about the possibility that Joe Biden is not actually running the country, but rather has “handlers” guiding him. They often express concerns about what they see as clear cognitive decline.

• Republicans frequently express concerns about Biden's mental acuity. They point to his recurring verbal stumbles, confusion, and gaffes as evidence of cognitive decline.
• They often cite Biden’s age, physical weakness, and frequent confusion as evidence of his decline.
• There are many references to Biden forgetting important details, or misspeaking. His recent mistake in mixing up Macron and Mitterrand has been a recent point of interest.
• There are repeated suggestions that Biden is "gaslighting" the public for votes or acting out of treasonous motivations.
• Many express concern over potential corruption and general incompetence within the Biden administration.
• Strong sentiments of disbelief and frustration are present, with some voters calling for Biden’s impeachment or for him to undergo cognitive testing.
• Many Republicans feel that Biden's lack of press appearances and obfuscation from his spokespeople are indicative of a more serious health issue.
• They also seem to believe that Biden's reelection would be terrible for the country due to a low probability of his completing a second term.
• This narrative is often accompanied by criticism of Vice President Kamala Harris, with detractors suggesting that she is unqualified or ineffective in her role.

Public Awareness on the Border

Recent MIG data shows online discussions about border security is significantly increasing, implying rise in awareness and concern among Americans. The general sentiment among Republicans, Democrats, and Independents appears to be that of concern and frustration, albeit for differing reasons.

• In the last 90 days, conversation online about the border has dramatically increased from an average of 2,951 mentions per day in November to 11,088 mentions per day in January.
• In the past week, online discussion about the border has averaged 15,462 mentions per day with February 4 reaching a high of 25,228.

• American sentiment about the border has decreased in the last 90 days. Public sentiment dropped from a consistent 50% in November to 43% today.
• Sentiment on border security has remained below 50% for 84 straight days.

Reactions to the Proposed Border Bill

Discussions about the Lankford border bill appear to be highly polarized and emotionally charged. In general, the discussions also reveal a perceived link between immigration and crime. This suggests that a significant portion of the online discussion on immigration is driven by concerns over safety and rule of law.

Republicans

Sentiment among Republicans seems to be predominantly negative with strong criticism towards the border bill.

• Republicans perceive it as an open borders bill that would allow unchecked immigration and jeopardize national security.
• There are numerous calls for strict immigration control, including the deportation of illegal immigrants and the closure of the border.
• Many accuse the Biden administration of facilitating illegal immigration, which they believe has led to an increase in crime, particularly referencing recent events in New York.
• Republicans also express support for actions against certain Democratic representatives, particularly Ilhan Omar.
• Many advocate for the completion of the southern border wall initiated under Trump's administration.
• Some have even suggested extreme measures like crocodiles in rivers, electrified fences, and drones with bombs.

Democrats

• Democrat voices are less prominent in these border discussions. But there is some criticism of Republicans for spreading what they see as racist and hateful rhetoric.
• Those on the left challenge the narrative of open borders and argue that encounters at the border do not equate to an increase in the U.S. population
• Sentiment suggests they believe Republicans are spreading misinformation about the bill and using the immigration issue to stoke fear and gain political advantage.
• There are accusations of Republicans fear-mongering, particularly toward Trump and Governor Abbott.
• There is also criticism towards the spending on the wall, with some Democrats arguing that the funds could be better used for other domestic issues.
• Democrats continue to be largely critical of the border wall, but are less engaged in discussion about the current crescendo of concern around safety and rule of law.

Independents

• Sentiment among independents is harder to pin down due to the diversity of views within this group.
• There is a noticeable contingent who suggest unorthodox solutions to the border issue, like building a wall on the northern border with Canada.
• Independents are not as vocal as Republicans, but it can be inferred that they are generally concerned about border security and immigration policies.
• They seem to have more nuanced views, but tend to see the need for both border security and humane treatment of immigrants.

Reactions to James Lankford

The online sentiment regarding Senator James Lankford's actions on border security is overwhelmingly negative. Many express dissatisfaction with his border security bill, viewing it as detrimental to the United States.

Approval for Lankford has fluctuated in the last 14 days with a high of 54% and a low of 38%.

Disapproval

• Many argue Lankford’s bill will lead to an influx of 2-3 million illegals per year or 20-30 million in a decade, effectively ending USA borders altogether.
• There’s also dissatisfaction with the bill’s distribution of funding. Many express indignation over possible allocation of more funding to Ukraine and Israel over border security.
• A few voices accuse Lankford of being swayed by bribes or outside interests rather than prioritizing the needs of American citizens.
• Some voters in Oklahoma, Lankford's home state, voice their disappointment, stating that they are closely watching his actions.
• There is a sentiment of betrayal among some Oklahomans who accuse Lankford of siding with Democrats and "selling out" Oklahoma.
• There are numerous calls for him to step down from his position, with some referring to him as a "RINO."
• There's a sentiment of betrayal and a threat of political repercussions with some users threatening to primary him in upcoming elections.
• Across party lines, there seems to be a perceived lack of focus on domestic issues.
• Overall, sentiments reflect a demand for markedly tighter border security measures, as well as a broad disapproval of the bill's provisions.

Approval

• Despite the overall negative sentiment, there are a few voices that view aid to Ukraine as beneficial to the US economy and thus support Lankford's bill.
• Arguments that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has led to unprecedented demand for US arms sales, providing a significant boost to the American economy.
• There are a few voices of support for Lankford, arguing that he is focused on results rather than political posturing.
• However, these voices appear to be in the minority.

Reactions to Alejandro Mayorkas

Online sentiments toward Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas appear to be largely negative, with a strong focus on his alleged failure to handle the issues at the border effectively.

• Many commenters accuse Mayorkas of lying about his efforts to address what they perceive as an "invasion" at the border.
• People believe he has not taken action to curb the surge of illegal border crossings. Some even suggest that he's aiding and abetting the situation.
• This sentiment is mostly held by those who believe that Mayorkas and President Biden's border policies have exacerbated the crisis at the southern border.

Approval for Mayorkas has fluctuated in the last 14 days with a high of 48% and a low of 44%.

Division on a Mayorkas Impeachment

While talk about the border situation is generally negative, there seems to be more division about a possible Mayorkas impeachment.

Approval

• There is a strong call from many for his impeachment, with some arguing that his handling of the US-Mexico border crisis is a breach of public trust.
• Many accuse him of lying to the American people and Congress and failing to enforce border security laws.
• There is a belief that Mayorkas has not protected the homeland effectively and should be held accountable for his actions.
• Many say Mayorkas and Biden are ignoring laws they should be enforcing and do have power to act on this issue.
• Supporters insist that it is the duty of Congress members to vote in favor of his impeachment. They also accuse him of being a "Constitution hater."

Disapproval

• On the other hand, there are many who view the potential impeachment as a partisan ploy by House Republicans.
• Arguments that the impeachment is not about Mayorkas's job performance but an attempt to make the border issue a political talking point against the Biden administration.
• Dissenters argue that the impeachment is a political stunt, a "hit job," and an abuse of the process.
• There are some voices who say the impeachment will not pass the House vote and question the timing of the impeachment.
• Some argue that Mayorkas does not have the authority to set the US immigration agenda and that this responsibility lies with Congress.

Plummeting Approval for Newsom’s Crime Policies

Newsom is frequently cast in public discussion as being out of touch and ineffective in his handling of California’s crime issue. Discussion online spiked as a result of a video clip where Newsom says he was blamed for a shoplifting incident to his face. People find his story either ironic or fitting. Californians say Newsom’s story shows a failure to address crime and shoplifting effectively.

• On the topic of “crime,” Gavin Newsom’s approval score dropped to a 7-day low of 27%.
• His approval bounced back to 44% on the day of his comments as discussion volume surged.
• Following his shoplifting comments, discussion volume related to crime and Newsom doubled.

• Newsom’s support overall, including the topic of “crime,” reached a 7-day low of 40%, including the day his shoplifting comments became public.

What People Are Saying

Online discussions show that people are expressing strong negative sentiment towards Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California, regarding the state's crime situation, especially in relation to shoplifting.

• People argue that Newsom's approach to handling crime in California is inefficient and ineffective.
• Californians express frustration and disappointment, citing an increase in taxes, high homelessness, rampant drug use, and uncontrolled crime rates as key issues.
• Many people feel these problems are direct results of Newsom's leadership and policies.
• There is a deep dissatisfaction with increasing instances of shoplifting and the overall crime rate in California.
• There's a sentiment that excessive amounts of tax money are not being used effectively, with some alleging corruption and misuse of funds.
• Many are blaming Newsom for creating an environment that is seen as favoring criminals.

Larger Contributing Issues

Many Californians see the crime increase as one problem among many other larger issues. Overall, the online sentiment towards Gavin Newsom in relation to crime in California is highly critical.

• There are suggestions that Newsom's policies are driving people out of California
• People accuse Newsom of being detached from reality and failing to acknowledge the impact of his policies on small businesses.
• They also argue that insurance companies are pulling out of California due to the rise in crime.
• Californians express a desire for stronger law enforcement, stricter policies towards criminals, and more effective solutions for homelessness and drug addiction.
• There is a belief that economic decline and problems like a failing school system and increased cost of living are causing people to leave California.
• A frequently expressed belief is that California has become excessively liberal under Newsom's leadership, with some labeling it as “communist.”
• Positive sentiments are few and far between, suggesting Newsom is facing significant public backlash over his policies.

Crime and the Border

A primary concern Californians discuss about the border is Newsom's perceived support for “open borders,” which they believe has led to an influx of illegal immigrants in the state. Many people attribute the high crime rates in California to Newsom's alleged failure to effectively control the state borders.

• People express anger and frustration towards Newsom, with some labeling him as a “dangerous person” and a “traitor” to California.
• They accuse him of condoning illegal immigration and even facilitating criminal activities, such as human trafficking and drug trafficking.
• There is also widespread belief that Newsom's border policies have resulted in a surge of crime in the state.
• Critics believe that illegal immigrants contribute to the high crime rates in the state, with some even suggesting that Newsom's administration has turned California into a “criminal haven.”
• Many say Newsom’s neglect of important issues in favor of supporting illegal immigrants is a testament to his inability to effectively govern the state.

National Conversation About the Border

The online discussions about the US border are rife with emotion and conflicting opinions. An underlying theme in these discussions is the perceived failure of both the federal government and the GOP to protect Americans.

Greg Abbott

A key figure in these discussions is Texas Governor Greg Abbott, who is both lauded and criticized for his stance on border control.

• Abbott‘s statement against the Supreme Court's ruling allowing razor wire to be removed from the southern border has sparked fervent responses.
• Supporters applaud his assertion of Texas's rights against what they perceive as a federal government overreach.
• They view the situation at the southern border as an "invasion," expressing fears about illegal immigration and Texas.
• Critics accuse him of fearmongering and of being absent during what he himself has labeled a crisis.

Donald Trump

Another key figure in the national conversation is Donald Trump.

• Many support Trump‘s wall as a means to control immigration, while others see it as an ineffective and divisive measure.
• Critics point out that the wall not only failed to solve the immigration issue but also inadvertently created easy access points for smugglers.
• They further argue that the situation at the border could have been prevented had Trump been competent in his initial attempts to build the wall.

Farmers

American farmers are also highlighted in the discussion, with some Americans praising them for supporting Texas in its efforts to stem the perceived "invasion" at the southern border.

Ilhan Omar

Multiple people express strong negative sentiments towards Representative Ilhan Omar, often linking her to what they perceive as an open-border policy.

• Commentors believe Omar‘s stance threatens national security.
• There are frequent calls for her to be removed from Congress and deported.
• Many are pointing to a perceived lack of allegiance to the US.
• A significant group of Americans seem to identify Omar as a key figure negatively affecting the border situation.

Democrats Overall

There's also a significant, recurring narrative that accuses Democrats of wanting open borders to score political points.

• Some suggest that this is a strategy to attract future voters from among illegal immigrants.
• Others accuse Republicans of creating fear and anger around the issue for their political gain.
• The current administration is frequently criticized for its perceived attempts to allow open borders and endanger the country.

Support for Key Figures Involved in Border Issues

James Lankford

There is no conversation specifically mentioning Sen. Lankford.

• In the last 7 days, Lankford’s average approval was 50%. Today it sits at 49%.

  

Joe Biden

• Many people blame Biden for the influx of illegal immigrants.
• There is criticism of the so-called "Biden-McConnell open borders amnesty bill," which some users feel would only increase illegal immigration.
• Biden’s 7-day average national approval rating was 47%. Today it’s 44%.
• His average approval in swing states over the last 7 days was 42%. Today it’s 42%.

Alejandro Mayorkas

• Some users believe Mayorkas is corrupt and accuse him of breaking the law.
• Calls for his impeachment, claiming he and Biden have committed treason by not fulfilling their oaths of office and endangering American citizens.
• In the last 7 days, Mayorkas’s average approval rating was 45%, and 43% today.

  

Greg Abbott

• There is praise for his efforts to protect the Texas border and his attempts to rally support from other states to address the situation.
• Governor Abbott is seen as a strong leader by many.
• There is some criticism with some attributing the state's immigration issues to his governance.
• Discussion about Abbott's controversial decision to send busloads of immigrants to other states. Some say it’s an attempt to avoid addressing the root of the problem.
• In the last 7 days, Abbott’s average approval rating was 47%. Today it sits at 47%.

What Are MAGA and Progressive?

There are some clear trends in how people use and perceive the concepts of “MAGA” versus “Progressive.” In general, MAGA is associated with pro-Trump Republicans. The term progressive is generally associated with liberal or left-leaning politics. However, there are some varying definitions and perceptions for each word, depending on a group or person’s viewpoint.

How MAGA is Used

• MAGA is often linked with a conservative political stance.
• Discussions frequently referring to traditional values, resistance to “wokeness” or progressive ideologies, and an emphasis on patriotism.
• Supporters view MAGA as a symbol of defiance against political correctness.
• MAGA is often used to express support for stricter border control and election integrity.
• The term is often used pejoratively by those who disagree with these views, associating MAGA with regression, intolerance, divisiveness, and a lack of progress.
• However, supporters of MAGA tend to view it positively, associating it with a return to perceived traditional American values and norms.

How Progressive is Used

• The term “progressive” is often associated with left-wing politics, social justice issues, inclusivity, and change.
• Progressive is frequently used to criticize the Biden administration's handling of border control and economic issues.
• Critics of progressives often use the term “woke,” implying that progressives are overly sensitive and focused on political correctness
• Supporters of progressivism view it as a necessary drive towards social and economic justice and equality.
• MIG data shows the term “progressive” is often used online negatively toward those with left-leaning politics. Liberals themselves seem to use it less often in these discussions.
• A possible conclusion could be that “progressive” is losing effectiveness as a branding term.

MAGA Conservatives

According to MIG data, the perception of MAGA among conservatives includes:

• A strong stance on the US border including support for stricter security and physical barriers.
• Prioritizing America’s issues and struggles at home as opposed to over-funding foreign aid.
• There are internal debates within MAGA about how the party should be lead and whether Republicans can find unity.
• Donald Trump remains the figurehead of the MAGA movement and feelings of negativity or positivity toward MAGA correlate with feelings about Trump.
• There are internal disagreements within MAGA between populist and conservative views of abortion.
• MAGA supporters often express strong support for Israel, viewing it as an ally in the Middle East and criticizing Hamas for the escalation of violence.

The discussions show that conservatives view MAGA positively, associating it with personal freedom, protection of individual rights, and a bulwark against perceived threats like big tech censorship, 'woke' culture, and perceived liberal agenda.

Progressive Democrats

According to MIG data, the perception of progressives among left-leaning people includes:

• Leftists generally view progressives favorably, seeing them as advocates for social justice, diversity, and equity.
• Progressives are seen as champions of change, fighting for issues like race and gender equality, and climate change.
• There’s support for plight of the Palestinians and criticism of Israel for what leftists perceive as disproportionate use of force and violation of human rights.
• Discussions about the economy and taxes are relatively low, suggesting either lack of concern among leftists or quiet disagreement with progressive economic polices.
• Progressives are not directly mentioned in discussions on the border but are implicitly positioned as the ideological opponents of MAGA conservatives.
• Overall, on the top trending topics that do not include social justice and equity issues, there is low discussion volume among progressives and democrats.

The discussions show that liberals view progressivism positively, associating it with gender equality, social justice, diversity, and .

Moderates and Independents on MAGA vs Progressive

There is a clear distinction between how conservatives view MAGA and how moderates and independents see it. Similarly, leftists view progressives positively and the perception by moderates and independents tends to be more negative. The perception of both MAGA and progressives seems to be largely influenced by political affiliation, leaving moderates skeptical.

MAGA

• Some moderates perceive MAGA positively for its focus on economic growth and national pride.
• MAGA has recently gained some support from moderates and independents on things like the Texas border crisis and child sex change operations.
• There are concerns about divisive rhetoric, perceived authoritarianism, and its association with far-right ideologies.
• Many moderates perceive MAGA as an extreme or radical representation of conservative politics.
• There is criticism for controversial aspects like a perceived association with nationalism, xenophobia, and aggressive foreign policies.
• While some moderates are critical of Biden, they express skepticism about the effectiveness of MAGA’s impeachment push as a solution.
• Many moderates express dislike for Trump and an unwillingness to vote for him.

Progressives

• Some moderates appreciate the progressive focus on social issues and equality, others express concern about perceived radicalism, identity politics.
• Moderates and independents tend to support progressive views on abortion and criticize MAGA for its perceived stance on women’s health.
• There is also criticism among independents for a perceived disregard for economic realities in leftist politics and Bidenomics.
• Many moderates are critical of progressive attitudes toward the Israel-Hamas conflict.
• There is dislike for progressive silence on the border and are perceived as promoting open borders and enabling illegal immigration.
• Some feel that the progressive movement is too focused on symbolic gestures rather than substantive policy changes.

Discussions online about the recent SCOTUS ruling that Texas must not use razor wire at the border are highly charged and divided. The majority of sentiments expressed are in favor of border control measures. Many express frustration towards the Republican party's actions regarding immigration policy and border control.

• Between 6,000 and 14,000 people have been talking about border and immigration issues daily in the last week.
• Public sentiment towards border issues in the last 7 days averaged 45%.

What Texans are Saying About the Border

• Texans show strong support for the enforcement of border control measures.
• Many Texans are outspoken about their belief in the need for a physical barrier, such as a wall, to deter illegal border crossings.
• There is great support for the actions of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and criticism of the Biden administration's immigration policies.
• A majority of Texans are critical of SCOTUS' ruling to remove the razor wire.
• Abbott supporters argue that the state's actions are necessary to ensure security and protect against threats such as drug cartels and human trafficking.
• Some also contend that federal interference in the state's efforts to control the border is unwarranted.
• A recurring sentiment is that voters support legal immigration, but not illegal immigration.
• Many commenters express support for Texas' stance on immigration.
• Texans applaud Abbott's actions, such as deporting over 100,000 undocumented immigrants, and seem to favor strict border control measures.
• Voters are critical of supposed conservative leaders whom they perceive as not adhering strictly to conservative principles, including Justice Barrett.
• There is a sense of dissatisfaction with the current Republican party in Texas, with calls for more conservative leadership and criticism of perceived liberal agendas.
• Many express readiness to assist in defending the border, criticizing the federal government.
• A minority contingent of people condemn the use of razor wire as inhumane and dangerous.

Overall, the majority of the discussions reveal a split within the Republican party in Texas between those who align more with MAGA and more moderate or 'establishment' Republicans.

Approval for Texas Leaders

• In the days following the SCOTUS ruling allowing razor wire to be removed from the Texas border, Greg Abbott’s approval increased from 45% a week ago to 51% today.
• Ken Paxton’s approval increased from 47% a week ago to 50% today.

Reactions to Biden Administration Policy

• Public sentiment towards the Biden administration's immigration policies is overwhelmingly negative.
• There is a stark contrast between the collective sentiment towards the federal government's immigration policies and the state of Texas' stance on the issue.
• There is a general sentiment that Biden is prioritizing illegal immigrants over US citizens.
• Many people believe the Biden administration's policies are ineffective and have led to an increase in illegal border crossings.
• The sentiment is that Biden is not taking the necessary steps to secure the southern border and is contributing to an "invasion" at the southern border.
• Most commenters express strong opposition to what they perceive as an "open border" policy, and are advocating for stricter border control measures.
• Some progressive voices are present in the discussions, expressing support for a more diverse and progressive platform. However, these voices are in the minority.

Solutions the People Want

• Some propose the creation of a human wall or using the homeless population as a deterrent.
• Others suggest the construction of an electric fence.
• Many express support for more stringent measures, such as the use of razor wire at the border.
• There is also a call for state governors to bolster their State Guards in response to perceived federal government inaction.
• Some have expressed a desire for mass deportations, while others argue that such an approach would be unrealistic or result in conflict.
• Voters call for politicians who support open borders to step forward, suggesting a desire for transparency and accountability.
• There are repeated calls for the governor to declare the situation an "invasion," which could trigger legal authority for Texas to protect its own border.

In conclusion, the SCOTUS ruling and the broader issue of border control is a contentious topic amongst Texans and Americans in general. Overall sentiment leans towards a more conservative approach to immigration, with criticism directed at both state and federal officials for perceived inaction or leniency.

There is a clear divide within the Republican party in Texas, and a desire for more conservative leadership. Despite this, there is also a minority progressive voice advocating for more inclusion and border leniency.

Recent MIG data shows that the discussion on the Israel-Hamas war appears to have a mix of both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine comments on platforms like X (formerly Twitter). However, the majority of hashtagged comments tend to lean more towards pro-Palestine sentiments.

On TikTok, pro-Palestine hashtags vastly outweigh pro-Israel hashtags in a way that is inconsistent with other social platforms across the internet. This discrepancy suggests that pro-Palestine content on TikTok may not be completely organic.

In addition, discussion about the Israel-Hamas conflict significantly increased on social media following the October 7 attack. Prior to the 7th, posts about Israel and Palestine on both X and TikTok were negligible and posts and views dramatically increased from October 7 on.

Posts Before and After October 7

Average daily posts on X 15 days before and after October 7

• Posts using the hashtag #israel reached a high of 251,331 on X on October 7.
• Posts using the hashtag #palestine reached a high of 136,498 on X on October 7.

• Posts using the hashtag #israel reached a high of 181,500 on TikTok on October 7.
• Posts using the hashtag #palestine reached a high of 403,872 on TikTok on October 14.

Pro-Palestine and Pro-Israel Hashtags

• Since October 6, 2023, interest levels in pro-Palestine hashtags (#palestine and #freepalestine) have skyrocketed.
• Based on total post counts and TikTok’s proprietary interest score, pro-Palestine posts reached a high of nearly 1 million between October 14-20, 2023.
• In contrast, pro-Israel hashtags on TikTok only reached a high of just over 113,000 between October 7-13, 2023.
• Pro-Palestine content on TikTok vastly outweighs pro-Israel content. Since October 6, there were a total of 10 times as many pro-Palestine hashtags on TikTok as pro-Israel hashtags.

• On X, pro-Israel and pro-Palestine hashtags are much closer in volume. Tracking the hashtags #israel, #standwithisrael, #palestine, and #freepalestine, MIG data shows divided discussions.
• At the end of October, pro-Palestine hashtags on X reached a high of approximately 250,000.
• Pro-Israel hashtags on X reached a high of approximately 83,000 at the beginning of November.
• Pro-Palestine content on X outweighs pro-Israel content, but only by less than double since the end of October.

What People Are Saying

Based on the content of the analyzed discussions online, it is apparent that the comments heavily favor Palestine.

Palestine

• There is a high usage of hashtags such as #FreePalestine, #Gaza_Genocide, and #IsraelisGenocidalState, which indicates strong criticism of Israel.
• Pro-Palestine comments often criticize Israel's actions and policies, accuse Israel of human rights violations, and express sympathy for the Palestinians.
• They also call for a halt to Israel's occupation and the recognition of Palestine's statehood.
• These comments also tend to criticize U.S. politicians and policies that support Israel, and call for solidarity movements for Palestine.

Israel

• Pro-Israel comments, on the other hand, often criticize Hamas and accuse them of terrorist activities.
• They argue that Israel has a right to defend itself against Hamas' attacks, and some even call for the complete elimination of Hamas.
• These comments also often express concern for Israeli hostages and criticize the UN and U.S. politicians for their perceived support of Hamas.

Potentially Biased Content

The implications of MIG data raise concerns about the potential skewing or bias of content, especially on TikTok.

• Some commentors online suggest TikTok might be purposefully promoting or suppressing certain narratives, possibly as a result of commercial pressures or political influences.
• For example, Elon Musk's reaction to advertisers allegedly trying to influence X content raises questions about the potential for corporate or government influence over the dissemination of information on all social platforms.
• However, it is challenging to definitively determine whether the content is purposefully skewed, based on public comments alone.
• While the discussions suggest possible bias or skewing, they also reflect users' individual perceptions, which may be influenced by various factors.

Further research would be required to definitively establish the extent and nature of any potential skewing of content on TikTok.

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.