Since the Michigan primary, a growing movement of those voting “Uncommitted” in Democrat primary races has gained momentum. The organic movement was created out of protest of the Biden administration’s handling the Israeli-Palestinian war. Party infighting between Joe Biden Democrats and Uncommitteds is complex and multifaceted. This analysis will focus on three main areas: reasons for Uncommitted voters, perceptions of Biden, and the influence of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Reasons for Uncommitted Voters

Uncommitted voters in the Democrat Primary may be unwilling to support Biden for a variety of reasons. Some may not align with Biden's perceived moderate political views, preferring more progressive candidates. Others may be skeptical of his ability to enact meaningful change, given his long history in politics. Additionally, some voters may be wary of his age and health, questioning his ability to serve a full second term as president.

Perceptions of Biden

Public perception of Biden varies widely. Some view him as a steady hand with the experience and pragmatism needed to lead the country. Others see him as a career politician, disconnected from the needs of ordinary Americans. His handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict, in particular, has drawn criticism from both sides. More progressive voters believe he is too supportive of Israel, while more traditional Democrats argue he is not supportive enough.

Influence of the Israel-Palestine Conflict

The Israel-Palestine is one of the most significant issues on voter perceptions of Biden. Israel supporters argue Biden's approach to the conflict is too lenient on Hamas. Palestine supporters argue his pro-Israel approach supports genocide. This divide is reflected in the Democrat Party with younger or more progressive voters demanding support for Palestine and older or more moderate Democrats insisting the U.S. supports Israel.

Uncommitted Votes

• Hawaii and Minnesota have received the highest Uncommitted votes so far with 29% and 19%.
• Biden continues to receive critiques from the progressive wing of the Democrat Party, threatening his potential to have a strong showing against Trump in a general election.

The public perception of Tyson Foods' hiring practices is becoming quite negative among many Americans. Discussions are particularly negative regarding news that Tyson Foods will shut down its Iowa pork factory, which broke alongside reports the company has hired 42,000 migrant workers and would like to hire that many more.

Some people are criticizing the company for prioritizing profits and open border policies over American employees. Many also accuse Tyson Foods of poor working conditions and unfair labor practices, including the alleged wrongful termination of workers.

Many Americans accuse Tyson Foods of being too liberal or woke, implying the company is overly concerned with diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) at the expense of other factors.

Some, however, support for Tyson Foods, acknowledging the company provides job opportunities in regions where employment opportunities may be scarce. These users argue that despite the criticisms, Tyson Foods plays a crucial role in the local economies where they operate – and especially for migrants looking for work.

Border and Jobs Sentiment Among Iowa Voters

In Iowa, voters seem dissatisfied with loss of American jobs while migrants seem to receive preferential treatment. Sentiment towards border security and jobs among Iowa voters has been particularly low in recent days.

• In the last 14 days, sentiment on jobs in Iowa sank to a low of 30% and reaching a high of 51%. Jobs sentiment averaged 40%.
• Sentiment about the border in Iowa sank as low as 29% in the last two weeks, with a high of 46%. Border sentiment averaged 38%.

• The border and the economy are among the top three issues Iowa voter are discussing, indicating their importance.

Some Iowans are criticizing Tyson Foods, alleging they will pay migrant workers less than minimum wage. They are calling for boycotts against Tyson Foods and advising others to buy local instead. Many voice concern about the impact on American workers and call for penalties for companies that hire illegal immigrants.

Others in Iowa question the legality and ethics of Tyson Foods’ practices, calling for stricter regulations and enforcement.

American Views of Corporate Hiring and Job Prospects

The discussion also touches on broader themes related to business ethics, freedom of speech, and the role of corporations in society. Many American workers express the belief that businesses should be held accountable for their actions and should not exploit their power or influence for profit.

More Americans seem disgruntled by news that more domestic jobs have been going to foreign-born workers than native citizens. Among other complaints about the economy, American voters express discontent at the Biden administration’s claims about increasing jobs. Many believe that employment numbers are skewed because of America’s open border.

Another point of contention involving Tyson Foods is the company's use of temporary or contract workers. Some argue this practice allows Tyson to avoid providing benefits and other protections to its employees. Others, however, feel it's a necessary business strategy in a highly competitive industry.

Another common theme, according to MIG Reports data, is the company's alleged lack of transparency. There is a sense of frustration with what workers perceive as Tyson's unwillingness to openly discuss its hiring and firing practices.

The hashtag #BidensBorderBloodbath has emerged as a focal point in the ongoing debate about the U.S.-Mexico border under President Joe Biden's administration. This online discourse reflects a broader national conversation on immigration and border security, and it doesn't look great for Biden.

Support for Biden on Immigration Issues, in particular, has dropped to a weekly low of 46%.

Republicans seized upon the hashtag to castigate President Biden's handling of the border crisis, attributing it to what they perceive as lax immigration policies and contrasting the media's narrative on Trump's "bloodbath" comments. They argue that the reversal of former President Trump's stringent measures has led to a surge in illegal crossings and subsequent violence, dubbing the situation a "bloodbath." Many Republicans assert that the Biden administration's actions have directly endangered American citizens and advocate for stricter border control measures to address the crisis.

The trend forced Democrats to address accusations of mishandling the border crisis, prompting them to clarify their stance on immigration and asylum policies. In large part, they defended President Biden's approach to immigration, emphasizing the humanitarian imperative behind it. They contend that migrants are fleeing dire circumstances in their home countries and seeking asylum in the U.S. as a refuge from violence and poverty.

Democrats criticize the use of #BidensBorderBloodbath as fearmongering tactics, arguing that it oversimplifies complex issues and demonizes immigrants. Instead, they call for comprehensive immigration reform that addresses root causes while maintaining America's commitment to human rights.

The online discourse surrounding #BidensBorderBloodbath reflects broader societal tensions and political polarization. It serves as a microcosm of the ongoing immigration debate, highlighting the stark differences in ideology and policy priorities between Republicans and Democrats.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs generate a high level of polarization in the viewpoints across online discourse. Some people support DEI programs, viewing them as important tools to foster more inclusive and equal societies. They believe its efforts are to bridge the gap between different racial, ethnic, gender, and religious groups. They see DEI programs as a way to educate people about the importance of embracing diversity and promoting equality.

However, many others express skepticism and resentment towards DEI programs. They see these initiatives as forced and unnecessary, arguing they lead to reverse discrimination or that they are a form of political correctness gone too far. Others believe DEI programs do not address the issues they claim to and, rather, are tokenistic and break down traditional values.

Many view DEI as an ideology that exacerbates division and is a breeding ground for anxiety and depression. Some in this group believe “woke” activists are more likely to be unhappy, anxious, and depressed. This is backed by a study by psychological researchers in Finland, which has is frequently mentioned in these discussions.

MIG Reports also analyzed a trend of people calling for more transparency and accountability for DEI programs. They argue organizations need to provide clear evidence that these programs are effective, and not merely symbolic gestures.

Viewpoints on DEI can often be simplified in the “right-left” paradigm. There is also a gender aspect to the discussion, with the Finnish study suggesting that women are more likely to identify with woke beliefs than men. This has prompted conversations about gender roles and societal expectations.

Deeper Analysis

More Americans accept the possibility of DEI practices producing unintended outcomes. They believe forced DEI practices lead to negative impacts on organizational effectiveness, compromised safety standards, disrupted workflows, or internal tensions. For instance, if DEI initiatives prioritize diversity metrics over technical qualifications in hiring or promotion decisions, many believe it will lead to issues with competence or performance in critical roles within the aerospace industry.

Recently, online discussions about airline travel, airline delays, and airline safety events are trending — specifically regarding Boeing. Late 2023 saw large, parallel Google search trends spike for “DEI” and “Boeing.” 

Americans are beginning to push back on DEI programs and other forced diversity projects pushed by the media or corporations. Some of the issues many fear could arise from the forced introduction of DEI practices include: 

Compromising Safety Standards

Prioritizing diversity metrics over technical qualifications in aerospace industries may compromise safety standards, potentially increasing the risk of errors or safety incidents, especially if critical roles lack the necessary technical expertise due to diversity-focused hiring decisions. 

Disrupting Workflows

Introducing DEI initiatives may disrupt operations and productivity, potentially causing interruptions and delays to production schedules. 

Creating Internal Tensions

Forced DEI practices, if perceived as unfair, may lead to internal tensions, decreased collaboration, and morale issues among employees who believe diversity metrics supersede merit-based criteria in hiring, promotion, or project assignments. 

Undermining Competence and Performance

Prioritizing diversity metrics over technical qualifications in DEI initiatives for hiring or promotion decisions may lead to decreased competence and performance in critical roles. 

Legal and Regulatory Compliance Risks

Implementing DEI practices without considering legal requirements may expose organizations to compliance risks, including potential legal challenges, fines, and reputational damage if discriminatory practices violate anti-discrimination laws.

Former President Trump made comments over the weekend about China attempting to bring car manufacturing to Mexico. He said they must be stopped from importing cars into the U.S. and that, if he is not elected, the economic result for American car manufacturing will be a “bloodbath.” The media’s interpretation of Trump’s comments has generated debate, with people interpreting the comments largely through their political lens.

Democrats generally view the comments as threatening and indicative of Trump's refusal to accept potential election losses. They argue that such language is dangerous and could incite violence among Trump's supporters. Some Democrats, however, say they understand Trump's comments were taken out of context and that he was not referring to potential violence, but rather the impact on the automotive industry if he were not elected.

Republicans are largely defending Trump, arguing that his comments were intentionally misrepresented by the media. They assert that Trump was talking about the economic consequences for industries like automotive manufacturing if he is not elected. They accuse the media of manipulating Trump's words to fit a negative narrative and fuel political tensions. However, some Republicans also perceive the comments as a warning of potential unrest or violence.

Independents are split in their interpretations of Trump's comments. Some agree with Democrats that the comments are a threat and could incite violence. Others side with Republicans, criticizing the media for taking Trump's words out of context.

Independents criticize Trump's choice of words and question his suitability for the presidency, but they also argue the media and certain political factions may be overblowing the remark.

Talking About - Donald Trump

Approval - Donald Trump

There seems to be an overall sentiment that the media sensationalizes Trump's comments. Both Republicans and some Independents are disillusioned with the media and argue that its portrayal of Trump's comments as a threat of violence is a clear distortion of his actual words. They believe that the media is disingenuous about their interpretation of the comment, furthering a negative narrative about Trump.

Some say the media puts Trump’s words in the worst possible light to generate controversy and boost ratings, taking every opportunity to attack Trump and those who do not condemn him. However, many Democrats and some Independents disagree, asserting that the media is accurately reporting Trump's threatening rhetoric.

Reactions to Judge McAfee’s ruling not to disqualify Fani Willis from prosecuting Trump are generally negative online. Although, there are polarized sentiments that fall along political lines. Much of the vocal discussion seems to be from conservative, particularly pro-Trump, individuals or outlets, with a noticeable amount of negative commentary directed towards Willis.

Many voters both nationally and in Fulton County, Georgia express outrage at Willis and her team, accusing them of being corrupt and unfit for office. There are repeated calls for investigations into Willis' use of federal and county funds, with allegations that she misused these resources.

While much of the discussion is partisan, those who support Willis most often voice relief over her ability to continue prosecuting Trump – rather than defending her against corruption allegations. This suggests Democrats feel more passionate about successfully convicting Trump than correcting any perception of corruption in Georgia courts.

Judge McAfee is being largely criticized for his rulings, with some users accusing him of being corrupt or untrustworthy. Many voters believe he should have removed Willis and Wade from the Trump case, and some believe McAfee is acting to ensure his election.

Some say Willis' actions are highly suspicious and potentially illegal, calling for her to be investigated under federal RICO charges, herself.

Partisan Democrats Want to “Get Trump”

Liberal-leaning voters mostly see the decision to keep Willis on the Trump case as a win for their side. They seem to view the situation as a chance for justice to be served against Trump, and express anticipation at the prospect of Willis continuing to prosecute the case.

Instead of defending Willis and Wade as ethical and unjustly maligned, these commenters are more likely to emphasize the importance of justice against Trump. However, these positive sentiments appear to be less common than the negative ones.

Supporters of Willis at the national level celebrate the judge's decision and express hope that she will be able to successfully prosecute Trump. They often frame this as a victory against Trump and his supporters.

Some Georgia voters see Willis as a powerful figure who is unafraid to challenge the status quo. They see her as a potential role model for other women and appreciate her determination in pursuing the case against Donald Trump. These voters also believe that personal scandals are being used as distractions from the real issues at hand.

Many among this group believe the case can proceed fairly without Wade's involvement. Nathan Wade's resignation is viewed by some as a necessary step for the case to move forward, while others see it as an indication of corruption and bias.

• Overall, Fani Willis support has remained strong in the high 40% range, despite severe negativity.
• It’s not totally clear whether support is directed at Fani Willis herself or, rather, her prosecution against Trump.

Georgia Voters Fear for the Integrity of Fulton County Courts

Georgia voters, while also showing a division in opinion, seem to be more focused on the potential impact of Willis's actions on the state's political landscape. Many in Fulton County express frustration over what they see as a lack of justice in the case proceedings.

Local reactions often include more specific references to Georgia politics. Critics accuse corruption and call for investigations into Willis's use of federal and county funds. They also respond to McAfee’s ruling with calls for Governor Brian Kemp to act against the perceived state corruption.

Some Georgia voters feel the corruption in Fulton County is some of the worst in the nation. They have called on the Georgia Ethics board to investigate both Willis and Nathan Wade. Georgians disapprove of allegations that Willis overpaid Wade using taxpayer money. Some voters are calling for the resignation or recusal of Willis from the Trump election case.

Many Georgia voters view Willis as a corrupt figure who has abused her power for personal gain. They accuse her of taking advantage of her position to live a luxurious lifestyle while her constituents live in poverty. This criticism seems to be based on perceptions of Willis's character rather than her professional conduct.

Sentiment in Fulton County seems to indicate a general frustration with political corruption, ineffective government, and inadequate action against perceived injustices.

• Donald Trump’s overall approval in Georgia is moderately strong in the mid 40% range.
• Trump’s approval, specifically on legal allegations in Georgia, has risen above his overall approval, suggesting Georgians are sympathetic to his defense.

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.

The current political climate is extremely polarized, and people are expressing negativity towards both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. The impeachment proceedings against Biden are a major focus with Swing State voters, though they appear to be stalling. Many people express resentment towards this process, viewing it as a waste of time and a risk to national security.

There is also criticism towards Biden's handling of the economy, border control, and healthcare. Some voters express regret for voting for Biden in 2020, citing dissatisfaction with his performance and policy implementation.

Another recurring theme is the state of the economy, with critics pointing to rising inflation, increasing rent, and other cost-of-living challenges. They often refer to these issues as “Bidenomics,” implying dissatisfaction with Biden's economic policies.

There are also personal attacks, deflection, and whataboutism in the discourse, with users accusing each other of bias or ignorance. This suggests a highly polarized and contentious political climate.

Arizona

Arizonans seem greatly unsatisfied with current immigration policies, making it a top issue. Critics argue Biden’s approach is too lenient, citing instances of the administration providing travel “loans” to illegal immigrants as part of a United Nations Migration Scheme. This is seen as a controversial move, particularly when juxtaposed against the economic struggles facing Arizonans.

Economic policy is another critical factor. The Trump and Biden administrations have very different approaches to issues such as taxes, spending, and regulation. The perceived success or failure of these policies can significantly impact public sentiment and influence voter behavior.

• Trump has a slight lead over Biden in Arizona, gaining 45.4% support to Biden’s 44.5%.

Michigan

Two of the most important issues to Michigan voters are Biden’s economy and the lingering influence of Donald Trump on the Republican party.

Michiganders criticize Biden's economic policies for increasing the cost of living. Some express their dissatisfaction with rising prices of everyday commodities and gasoline. The economy will likely be a large factor in the election for Michigan voters.

People are also discussing Trump's ongoing influence within the Republican party. Despite the controversies surrounding his term, he remains a popular figure within the party. This is seen as good or bad, depending on a voter’s viewpoint.

• Trump is leading Biden in Michigan 46.4% to 45.2%.

North Carolina

In North Carolina, voters are expressing concern over election interference and the role of social media platforms in disseminating information. There’s a lot of discourse around a recent TikTok bill and the potential for other platforms like X and Truth Social to be impacted in the future. The question of election interference is paramount in the minds of North Carolinians and will likely influence how they vote.

People are also discussing the role of intelligence agencies in monitoring domestic extremism. There is a growing sentiment that Americans are being unfairly spied upon by their own government, which is driving resentment and disillusionment. This sentiment could play a significant role in the election, particularly if Trump promises to gut the intelligence agencies and repeal the Patriot Act.

Some North Carolina voters express regret for supporting Biden in 2020, citing dissatisfaction with national security and the economy. Others remain steadfast in their support for Biden, arguing that he represents a more stable and compassionate leadership option than Trump.

• Trump holds a lead over Biden in North Carolina, gaining 46.5% support to Biden’s 44.1%.

Nevada

Important issues among Nevada voters include healthcare, particularly concerning the cost of insulin for diabetics. A tweet from Kamala Harris about capping the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors indicates the Biden administration is aware of voter sentiment on this topic.

The state of the economy, specifically inflation, is another significant issue for Nevadans. Some blame the current economic state on the Biden administration, referring to the "Biden economy" negatively.

The cognitive health of Joe Biden is another significant factor discussion topic. Some have concern over Biden's cognitive abilities, suggesting that voting for Biden could essentially be voting for Kamala Harris, considering the possibility of him not being able to complete his term.

There are some Nevadans who indicate dissatisfaction and regret about voting for Biden in 2020. Some express disappointment with Biden's perceived lack of progress or negative impact on the economy, while others voice concern over his cognitive health.

Among Trump supporters, there is celebration over some charges against him being dismissed, indicating strong support for a second term.

• Trump holds a 4.5-point lead over Biden in Nevada, gaining 46.5% support.

Wisconsin

Donald Trump’s supporters appear to be unwavering, despite criticism and allegations of self-serving policies. Their loyalty seems to be based on the belief that Trump's policies align with their own interests and values more than those of any other candidate. This is revealed in Trump’s solid lead against Biden in Wisconsin.

In contrast, Biden supporters appear to be more focused on the broader implications of his presidency, emphasizing issues such as party unity, national stability, and global justice.

However, there is a criticism that these supporters are prioritizing Biden over these broader issues, which could potentially lead to his defeat.

Discussion suggests there may be some resentment or regret among Wisconsinites about voting for Biden in 2020. However, this seems to be largely overshadowed by the intense loyalty of both the Trump and Biden supporters. Another important factor for Wisconsin voters is the perceived threat to freedom of speech, which Trump is using to appeal to younger voters.

• Trump has a solid upper hand in Wisconsin, leading Biden by 6.5 points with 47% support to Biden’s 41.5%.

Georgia

Georgia could potentially pose a problem for Trump in the general election. MIG Reports data suggests most Nikki Haley supporters, who previously backed Trump, will likely vote for Biden. This shift could significantly influence the potential re-election of Biden.

Georgians are also concerned about issues like a potential TikTok ban and the perceived neglect of key social issues such as child mortality. These issues may work against Biden.

Biden’s potential impeachment also appears to be a factor for Georgia voters. The GOP’s persistence in pursuing impeachment is met with criticism and ridicule. Many Georgians seem to view impeachment attempts as desperate attempts to gain votes.

Election interference is another major issue, with accusations that Trump paid foreign agents to lie about Biden, attempting to affect the election. These contentious allegations contribute to the overall divisive and tense atmosphere.

• Trumps holds a slight lead over Biden in Georgia with 44.7% support to Biden’s 43.1%.

Pennsylvania

Critics of Trump in Pennsylvania often depict him as a wannabe dictator, pointing to his alleged attempts to subvert democratic norms. Accusations of corruption within his family, particularly Jared Kushner's dealings with Saudi Arabia, also appear to be a major point of contention.

His handling of foreign relations, particularly with Russia and Ukraine, is another frequently raised issue. There are calls for investigations into the Trump family's profits from the presidency, and some suggest Trump may be aiming for absolute immunity, which they fear could lead to dictatorial rule.

Trump supporters seem to dismiss allegations of Russian collusion as a Democrat hoax. They criticize the investigation into Trump's alleged influence peddling as politically motivated.

Some Pennsylvania voters are questioning Biden’s memory and fitness for presidency. His family's alleged involvement in influence peddling is also a point of concern, with some calling for an investigation into these matters.

• Despite vocal critics of Trump in Pennsylvania, he currently leads Biden with 47% to 42% support.

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.