Nancy Pelosi recently appeared on MSNBC with Katy Tur, discussing Biden’s allegedly strong job growth numbers. Pelosi claimed Biden has created nine million jobs during his administration. In the exchange that followed, Tur asserted that job losses during Trump’s administration were due to COVID, rather than Trump’s policies.

Reactions to the interaction have split voters in an interesting way, with Republicans echoing Tur’s statement and Democrats siding with Pelosi. While reactions to the MSNBC exchange correspond with partisan divides, many Democratic voters are criticizing Tur and MSNBC for allegedly defending former President Trump.

This event suggests Democratic hatred for Trump may overcome ideological alignment with mainstream media outlets like MSNBC, which is widely viewed as left-leaning. Republicans point out that even a struggling economy and poor job prospects may not unify voters on contrasting narratives and political interpretations.

• Following the exchange between Pelosi and Tur, jobs sentiment toward Trump and Biden flipped, with Trump slightly surpassing Biden in approval.
• Sentiment toward MSNBC among all voters sits at 41%, with “propaganda,” “censorship,” and “fake news” among the top media-related discussion words.

Criticism of MSNBC and Katy Tur

Many voters across party lines are frustrated with MSNBC, especially Katy Tur. Democrats who agree with Nancy Pelosi’s accusation of Tur acting as a Trump apologist say Tur and the network promote a right-leaning bias. They appreciate Pelosi's criticism of Tur, and some have even called for Tur's replacement on MSNBC.

Conservative voters tend to assert Tur made a valid point about job losses during COVID, but still criticize MSNBC for its leftist bias. This group is more likely to discuss the general state of the economy and job market, with concerns about potential layoffs, increased unemployment, and concerns about inflation.

Following this contentious event, voters of all party affiliations express distrust and dissatisfaction with mainstream media, including MSNBC. A common criticism accuses the network of pushing narratives that align with certain political agendas.

Views of Nancy Pelosi

Interestingly, the exchange did not seem to negatively impact Nancy Pelosi’s approval. Many voters view Pelosi as a strong, assertive figure who challenges perceived bias in the media and unhesitatingly voices her opinions. Some Democrats thanked Speaker Pelosi for criticizing Katy Tur for defending Trump's job loss record.

However, many Republican voters are critical of Pelosi's comments, accusing her of undermining Trump's economic and jobs record. They argue Trump achieved significant job growth and that Pelosi is trying to manipulate the narrative to discredit him. These voters are mostly conservative and are generally opposed to Pelosi’s policies.

While partisan disagreement persists, there appears to be a consensus among both conservative and liberal voters that Pelosi is a skilled political operator. For conservatives, this manifests as critique of her as a master manipulator. For liberals, it is expressed as grudging respect for her ability to get things done.

• Despite Republican criticism, Nancy Pelosi’s nation approval increased slightly in the last few days, reaching 50% on April 30.

VP Kamala Harris’s recent appearance on Drew Barrymore's show appears to be drawing criticism and ridicule online. Discussions seem to be dominated by people who are highly critical of Harris and the Biden administration, with a few voices of support.

Barrymore’s comment that Harris should be “Momala” of the nation – a nickname her stepchildren gave her – was met with criticism and ridicule from many voters who poked fun at both Barrymore and Harris. There are also comments criticizing the Vice President’s recognizable laugh and what voters describe as her incomprehensible rhetoric. Many also regularly criticize mainstream media and celebrities for their obvious and cringeworthy political bias.

Harris claimed her laughter is a point of contention for many critics, but insisting the criticism she receives for it amuses her. The conversations seem to reflect the typical petty nature of political discourse, where personal quirks can become a focal point.

Drew Barrymore to Kamala Harris: “We need you to be ‘Momala’ of the country” 🤮

pic.twitter.com/tnqM0huxrK

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 29, 2024

The VP's Public Image is Lacking

The discussion about VP Kamala Harris, her laugh, and her confusing way of speaking seems to be divided by political affiliation. Democratic voters say they appreciate her strength and determination, praising the diversity she brings to the White House. In general, they tend to dismiss assertions that Harris is not well spoken or has a grating personality.

More right leaning voters often criticize her, saying she’s a failure and accuse her of neglecting her duties. They sometimes refer to her as being audibly illiterate and claim she rarely speaks coherent sentences. Republicans often brand her as an international embarrassment. Some even call her "Kamala Word-Salad Harris," implying her way of speaking is full of meaningless buzzwords.

As for her laugh, one voter says it's "not funny anymore," suggesting they find it irritating or inappropriate. Many seem to feel her laugh is too frequent, too loud, or not genuine. However, it's important to note that these comments are subjective and do not represent everyone's opinion.

Overall, the discussion seems to be highly influenced by political views. Most people's perceptions of Harris seem to largely depend on whether they align with her politically.

Overall Disapproval Toward VP Harris

• A common concern for the Democratic Party in recent years has been poor approval ratings for VP Harris.
• In the last two weeks, her approval has been sinking, even with a dramatic increase in mentions of her online.
• Just a day after her Drew Barrymore appearance went viral online, approval for VP Harris dropped to 37% nationally.

According to MIG Reports data, some of the most common observations about Harris include:

1. Criticism of her Laugh: Many say her laugh does not lend to the seriousness or impact of her public image, coming off as fake or ill-timed.
2. Accusations of Incompetence: Many voters view Harris as ineffective in her political career, particularly in her handling of the southern border crisis.
3. Support for Re-election: Despite the criticism, some Democratic voters still support VP Harris and President Biden, saying they plan to vote for them.
4. Concerns about Zionism: More progressive Democrats raise concerns about Harris's perceived support for Israel. They view her stance as Zionism.
5. Questions of Honesty: Some voters accuse Harris of lying about her support for the U.S. Constitution and gaslighting the public on certain issues.

MIG Reports analysis of the White House Correspondent's Dinner and Biden's attacks on Trump reveals Americans are conflicted, viewing Trump and Biden very differently. While some people seem to enjoy Biden's jabs at Trump, considering them either humorous or justified, many others believe they reflect poorly on Biden and show a lack of professionalism. This contrasts with Trump's recent successful public appearances, generating voter positivity.

Americans are focused on current ongoing foreign entanglements, a border crisis, and student unrest on campuses across the country. Much of the online commentary questions Biden’s image, including his cognitive function to seeming out-of-touch with American voters.

Many voters express concerns over Biden's fitness for office, with some calling for his impeachment and criticizing his administration's policies and actions. Several comments mention the failed impeachment inquiry against Biden, highlighting how some people believe it was doomed from the start due to lack of substantial evidence.

There is a clear division of opinion regarding Biden's reelection. Some express fervent support for Biden and his administration, intending to vote for him again in 2024. Others are vehemently against the idea of a second Biden term, citing issues such as his approval ratings and their dissatisfaction with his performance.

The White House Correspondent's Dinner appears to have been a significant event for many in the media and beltway, although average voters seem less interested. Some people appreciated Biden's remarks, while many found them distasteful or inappropriate.

Several discussions revealed support for Biden remains unmoved by the traditional Washington D.C. event with the overall sentiment leaning more towards criticism. Voters express concerns over Biden's competency and calls for his impeachment being frequently raised.

As Trump’s New York trial over alleged hush money payments gets underway, there’s significant partisan reactions on both sides. Republicans tend to be angry and frustrated about the trial, characterizing it as politically motivated and unjust. Democrats are more likely to celebrate the potential for punishment and criticize Trump’s behavior during the trail.

It remains to be seen whether the trial or possible convictions will impact Trump’s support in the presidential election. However, sentiment among all voters is lower regarding accusations made against Trump than the court case itself.

• The top three keywords used in discussions related to Trump and allegations, according to MIG Reports data, are “Corruption,” “Accusations,” and “Biden.”
• The top keywords related to Trump and legal topics are “Indictment,” “Investigation,” and “DOJ.”
• Nationally, sentiment toward Trump’s legal cases hovers in the low to mid 40% range, while sentiment toward allegations against him stays mid to high 30%.
• In swing states, sentiment for both topics is tighter, but averages higher for both legal and allegations.

Trump’s Gag Order

Many voters view the gag order against Trump as an unjust political move instigated by the Biden administration. Often Trump supporters, they express their frustration with politicized courts and judges who seem to be out to “get Trump.”

Furthermore, there are those who voice their concern over the potential impact of the gag order on democracy. They view the gag order as a threat to democratic principles, arguing that it hampers the ability of voters to make informed decisions as the election unfolds. This sentiment is more frequently held by Republicans and MAGA conservatives. But the concern does seem to cross party lines in some instances where voters are concerned about the integrity of the court system and elections.

Never Trumpers and Democrats tend to support the gag order, celebrating the idea that Trump should be silenced by a judge’s order.

Republicans Reactions to Jury Selection and Judge Merchan

Many Republicans view this hush money trial as politically motivated and part of a broader attempt to undermine the election. They argue Judge Merchan’s actions and the evidence allowed in the case are fueled by partisan bias and are unfair. Some suggest prosecutorial focus should be shifted to other political figures, such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, whom they accuse of committing crimes and violations.

Conservatives are also more likely to discuss the possibility of a biased jury. They point out that jury selection typically take longer – even in cases where the dependent isn’t a former president. This group worries that it will be nearly impossible for Trump to have an unbiased jury in a city like New York.

Democrats Are Eager for a Conviction

Democrats are largely enthralled and thrilled to witness the Trump trial. They say it is a necessary step towards holding him accountable for his alleged actions. They argue no one, including the President, should be above the law. This group often reiterates their belief that Trump undermines democracy and is a would-be dictator.

Most liberals and Democrats view the trial as a long-overdue measure of accountability. As inferred from Joy Reid's comments, some may see the prosecution of Trump as a victory for multicultural and multiracial democracy.

Democrats are also vocal about how they view Trump’s actions leading up to and during the trial. They criticize his demeanor in the court room and generally view the press's reporting on the trial as accurate and fair. Some Democrats have even called for Trump's immediate imprisonment.

Independents Say They’ll Judge the Trial on its Merits

Independent and more moderate voters have typically scattered views. Some express concern about the potential implications of a conviction if Trump should lose. Others question the timing and motivations behind the prosecutions.

Many Independents say they value weighing the facts of the case without the lens of party loyalty. They may be more focused on the legalities and the implications of the case for political norms and the rule of law. This could cause moderates to sway in Trump’s favor if they perceive a flimsy legal cause may be politicizing the court system.

Other believe Trump should face the consequences of his actions, siding with Democrats. However, in general, Independents are more likely to focus on the specific facts of the case rather than each party's rhetoric about the proceedings.

Media Coverage of the Trial

The press's coverage of the trial is similarly partisan. Conservative outlets tend to portray the trial as a politically motivated attack on Trump. They tend to focus on Judge Merchan’s actions and whether they believe the jurors can remain fair.

Liberal and mainstream outlets largely focus on describing Trump’s actions and demeanor in court. Some outlets have included analysis of Trump’s expressions and interactions in detail.

Many voters view various news coverage of the trial as biased according to political leaning. They also lament the fact that no video or audio from the trial is allowed, saying voters have a right to witness and judge for themselves.

The man who set himself on fire outside the trial has added another layer to the discussion. His extreme act has been reported widely, with his identity as an "investigative researcher" adding to confusion about his potential political affiliations.

Recent accusations of biased reporting against National Public Radio (NPR) have stirred up public resentment and calls for defunding. After veteran journalist Uri Berliner published an article with The Free Press chastising NPR for its unsupportable liberal bias, his subsequent suspension and resignation created controversy online.

My resignation letter to NPR CEO @krmaher pic.twitter.com/0hafVbcZAK

— Uri Berliner (@uberliner) April 17, 2024

Many discussions center around the belief that NPR, along with other mainstream media outlets, display a significant left-wing bias. People, including Berliner, argue NPR prioritizes a leftist agenda over objective journalism, contributing to polarization and distrust. This bias is perceived in the choice of stories covered, the framing of news narratives, and the selection of sources or experts for interviews.

Liberals tend to be more supportive, but some still have criticisms. They suggest NPR's bias is not so much a partisan issue but rather a reflection of the organization's commitment to "well-meaning liberal feel-good" coverage. They argue NPR is sometimes "wimpy" in its reporting and works hard not to offend anyone.

Disconcerting Comments from NPR’s CEO

There are heated debates around NPR's leadership, particularly the new CEO Katherine Maher. Critics argue her views undermine the objective pursuit of truth and threaten freedom of speech.

Berliner himself said in his resignation statement that her leadership “confirm the very problems” of leftist bias. Others like author Chris Rufo have exposed past comments from Maher, betraying her as an apparent leftist devotee. These discussions among journalists online have also generated public awareness and backlash.

EXCLUSIVE: Katherine Maher doesn't just want to "stamp out bad information" on the internet. She wants to replace it with "good information"—i.e., left-wing narratives—and force the public to "sit within that good information" as "a collective."

Big Sister has arrived. pic.twitter.com/7kfq8VYHfj

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) April 18, 2024

Maher’s defenders praise her leadership skills and commitment to transparency, brushing aside accusations of clear partisan loyalty. Many critics cite her past work with Wikipedia, tweets and posts stumping for Joe Biden, and clear cut liberal perspectives on identity politics, censorship, and the First Amendment.

Taxpayer Dollars Supporting Left-Wing Media

NPR's public funding is a contentious issue. Critics argue taxpayer money should not be used to fund a platform that is being exposed as biased and propagandist. They argue for defunding NPR, asserting it should be privately funded like other media outlets.

Criticisms of taxation and government spending amid other pressing issues like a struggling economy and benefits for illegal aliens seems to exacerbate negativity toward public funding for NPR. While Americans struggle to make ends meet, many seem appalled and indignant about tax dollars being spent to support outlets like NPR.

Overarching Distrust of American Media

The issue of bias in NPR's reporting is not isolated but is part of a broader conversation about media bias in the United States. Americans are increasingly polarized in their perceptions of media bias, with many believing most news outlets have a political bias. This has rapidly eroded trust in mainstream media and spurred an increasing reliance on alternative news sources.

Online discussions also suggest Americans believe mainstream media actively supports the current administration and various Democrat political figures. Many of these discussions accuse the media and Democrats of lying and coordinating to push messaging for Democrat politicians.

Many accuse NPR and other outlets of being a propaganda arm for the Democratic Party, saying their views are dismissed and unrepresented. Some also direct personal attacks at various media figures like Katherine Maher, Rachel Maddow, and Don Lemon.

There is also discussion about a 2014 Pew Research Center study which found that NPR's audience skews liberal, with 67% identifying as left-leaning while only 21% identifying as right-leaning. Many commentors say even these percentages fail to capture the true composition of NPR’s left leaning audience.

Overall, many Americans view the resignation of Uri Berliner as indicative of a larger trend of liberal bias in media organizations.

Current conversations around the possibility of Trump's re-election among Democratic, left-leaning, and progressive voices reveal much concern, skepticism, and outright opposition. Rachel Maddow and other left-leaning commentators often criticize Trump's policies and leadership style, frequently discussing the potential implications and risks of a second Trump term. At the same time, they dismiss or redirect from problems with the Biden administration.

Much of the commentary class is focused on nebulous topics which are difficult to quantify or provide nuanced discourse on. Common discussions among leftists and progressives regarding a second Trump term typically center around perceived authoritarianism, isolationism, and abuses of power. There is a strong sentiment among progressives that a second Trump term would lead to the destruction of democratic norms and increased polarization.

Authoritarianism

Progressives fear authoritarianism if Trump is reelected. They fear a combative press relationship, disregard for checks and balances, and unilateral decision-making, warning a second term would escalate into a more authoritarian leadership style.

Isolationism

Progressives worry about Trump's isolationist foreign policy, claiming it strains alliances, undermines global cooperation on climate change, and empowers authoritarian regimes. They fear a second term would prolong or worsen these trends.

Abuses of Power

This group asserts Trump abused power in his first term, highlighting actions like firing FBI Director James Comey and attempting to manipulate the Justice Department against political foes.

FISA Concerns

There is fear Trump might misuse FISA to target domestic political opponents, risking civil liberties.

These concerns are sometimes shared among moderate Democrats and Independents, although the intensity of the concerns vary. There is a significant portion of moderate Democrats and Independents who appear to be more focused on other issues, or who might view these concerns as overly alarmist. Additionally, moderate Democrats and Independents might disagree with progressives on policy issues, even if they share some of the same concerns about a potential second Trump term.

MIG Reports analysis identifies that online discussions about Biden outweigh those of Trump. Despite this, Trump’s approval ratings are generally higher across issues important to voters. This showcases that establishment media’s messaging is not representative of the electorate or even the entire Democratic party.

Online commentary among left leaning voters also reveals dissatisfaction with the current political climate writ large. While many do criticize the conservative right, there is also dissatisfaction with what they see as the failures of both liberal and centrist Democrats. Some argue for a more radical, leftist approach to politics. Others express frustration at what they perceive as a lack of focus on key issues like economic inequality, healthcare, and the environment.

The Biden administration’s performance is another major focus of Democratic voter commentary. Some criticize Biden for his handling of the border crisis. Others accuse his administration of denying women the right to buy houses by allowing a significant increase in housing prices.

There is criticism directed towards Vice President Kamala Harris, with some suggesting she was chosen for her identity rather than her abilities or success.

Many left leaning and progressive voters are unhappy with the current tax system, expressing concerns about misuse of tax dollars. These voters are frustrated with how their tax money is being used, especially in terms of foreign aid and government spending. They suggest tax dollars are being squandered or misallocated, and express resentment over the perceived lack of benefits they are receiving in return for their taxes.

After a recent video of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee showed her speaking at a high school during Monday’s solar eclipse. Jackson Lee is seen calling the moon a planet and saying it is “made up of gases.” She continued to say, "The sun is a mighty powerful heat, but it’s almost impossible to go near the sun. The moon is more manageable."

Comments from Americans online about Rep. Jackson Lee's statements are overwhelmingly negative. While Jackson Lee herself claims Republicans are criticizing her for something that is unimportant, voters seem to associate Jackson Lee’s misinformed comments as typical of politicians who regularly make false statements.

People online are mocking her for making such a glaring error. Some even called her a “moron” and others questioned the quality of her education. Many express disbelief that she has been re-elected multiple times despite her perceived lack of knowledge. The conversation strongly indicates a significant amount of voter dissatisfaction with Jackson Lee.

Voters also repeatedly bring up the fact that she used to sit on the House Science Committee and the House Space Committee, expressing incredulity that someone in her position could make such erroneous statements. They criticize her as being uneducated, incompetent, and even question her intelligence and that of anyone who voted for her.

Several comments also sarcastically suggest she should be the first person to try to live on the moon, given her belief in its gas composition. Some also express embarrassment and concern over her representation of Texas's 18th district.

Another emerging theme in the conversation connects Jackson Lee to Joe Biden, also mocking him for his own frequent fumbles, inaccuracies, and obvious cognitive decline.

The newsworthy event gave people a reason to criticize her for her policies as well. Some called her out for giving a poorly prepared eclipse speech rather than addressing more pressing issues like crime, border control, and high taxes.

People also seem frustrated about her being a part of the Congress that levies taxes. Overall, the sentiment appears to be negative, with voters voicing disapproval and mockery.

• Rep. Jackson Lee’s approval dropped as mentions spiked after the video was released.
• Her approval dropped from 47% on Sunday to 40% on Tuesday, along with an increase of online mentions from 14 to 278,

Voter Opinions of People in Congress

This incident with Sheila Jackson Lee echoes a broader theme in conversations about elected officials. There is a prevalent belief among American voters that most Congress members are self-serving, unaccountable, and lack the necessary qualifications to effectively carry out their duties.

Overall sentiment seems to be one of distrust and dissatisfaction. Many voters display a cynical view of the "ruling class" and their qualifications for office. People often feel their representatives are more interested in ideological posturing than in serving the people.

Several people express frustration with the perceived hypocrisy of politicians, suggesting they are out of touch with everyday Americans. Others take issue with politicians' intelligence, implying they are not informed or articulate enough to effectively govern.

There's a notable level of anger directed at both Democrats and Republicans, accusing both sides of being pompous and corrupt, as part of the political elite.

Another common sentiment is a perceived lack of accountability among members of Congress. Several voters say these officials have managed to evade consequences for their actions, further fueling the belief that they are above the law. This lack of trust in the integrity of Congress could contribute to voter apathy and disillusionment.

It seems most voters are deeply dissatisfied with the current state of American politics. This suggests a potential appetite for new voices and ideas in the political sphere.

Former ESPN anchor Sage Steele recently alleged on Fox News that her 2021 interview with President Biden was completely scripted. Steele claims the interview questions were prepared in advance and required strict adherence by the president’s communications team. Her comments about the interview, which originally aired on ESPN, are generating controversy in the field of journalism, opening discussions about the authenticity of the interview and journalistic integrity.

It also fans the flames of concern many Americans have about Joe Biden’s mental fitness for office. Many voters believe Biden’s cognitive acuity is rapidly declining, necessitating tight control over what the President says and what questions press are allowed to ask him.

In traditional journalism, it is considered unethical to provide interviewees with scripted questions beforehand. This is because it allows guests to prepare answers, which can potentially manipulate the narrative and mislead the public. The objective of journalism is to uncover truth and hold those in power accountable, which may be compromised when interviewees are given prepared questions.

In the case of President Biden, it also highlights concerns over his ability to answer questions extemporaneously, without confusion or large lapses in memory. Instances of Biden seeming disoriented during public appearances are a growing concern for many voters on both sides of the aisle.

The situation with Sage Steele and Joe Biden represents a recurring issue for Biden as more accusations emerge of scripted interviews with the press. In this instance, people speculate whether ESPN, as a major news outlet, allowed its journalistic standards to be undermined for a high-profile political figure. This has potential implications for the credibility of ESPN and any journalist who allows prepared questions for the president.

The controversy also raises questions about the role of media in politics. Many people believe if media outlets are accepting scripted questions from the Biden administration, it will lead to unfair bias, favoring the White House agenda over journalistic inquiry. This can lead to a lack of trust in the media and further polarize political discourse.

MIG Reports analysis of the original interview identified:

• The questions were tailored to convey specific messages.
• Themes included COVID-19 vaccination, sports-politics intersection, and family anecdotes.
• There was an emphasis on promoting vaccination and addressing election issues in Georgia.
• Concerns were raised about potential propaganda or manipulation.
• There were obvious elements of political messaging present in the interview.

The scripted nature of presidential interviews implies a corrupt relationship between politics and media in the modern era. While political leaders seek to control their messaging and shape public opinion, media organizations have a duty to prioritize journalistic integrity and independence.

This event highlights the importance of journalistic integrity and the potential implications of compromising unbiased reporting. It suggests a dereliction of duty by media outlets in holding the powerful accountable and providing the public with unbiased information.

The narrative around gun violence in mainstream media reports is heavily centered on mass shootings and the politicization of the Second Amendment. The discourse often revolves around debates about gun control, mental health reform, and the responsibility of lawmakers in implementing policies to curb gun violence.

However, there is a glaring lack of attention to the rampant gun violence that plagues inner cities. Meanwhile, there is an abundance of reporting on mass shooting incidents like the one in downtown Indianapolis, which left seven juveniles injured.

Americans largely perceive that media reporting is skewed towards sensationalized mass shootings, often ignoring the daily violence that affects marginalized communities in urban areas while also advocating for illegal immigrants to own guns.

Mainstream narratives rarely include the thousands of gun-related deaths and injuries that occur in, largely blue, urban areas. Stories about daily shootings in places like Chicago, Detroit, and Baltimore rarely make national headlines. This contributes to a perception that these incidents are normal or expected, thereby reducing the urgency to address them.

Online discourse often devolves into partisan debates about gun rights and controls. For instance, some voters accuse Chuck Schumer of using a fallen NYPD officer's death to push for gun control. Many claim Schumer and other Democrats politicize the issue. The Second Amendment is frequently invoked in these discussions, with some arguing gun control measures infringe upon constitutional rights.

The mainstream media's failure to highlight inner-city gun violence seems to perpetuate a skewed understanding of the issue. It often favors sensationalized incidents over the chronic violence affecting specific communities. This can lead to policies that do not adequately address the root causes of most gun violence, such as socio-economic disparities and inadequate policing.

Many Americans believe the mainstream media plays a critical role in shaping public opinion and policymaking regarding gun violence. It crucial for voters to have access to comprehensive and balanced new coverage – especially on issues like guns in America. Honest, unbiased reporting on urban gun violence would not only help raise awareness about the extent of the problem, but also promote more effective strategies to combat it. However, many people feel the media often draws false conclusions from a politicized point of view.

Online discussion among American voters and independent journalists often seems to directly dispute media narratives about gun violence. Some point out that most mass shootings are gang-related and occur in African American neighborhoods. This contrasts with the mainstream media's typical portrayal of mass shootings as random acts of violence committed by white, “lone wolf” perpetrators with extremist manifestos.