MIG Reports analysis shows recent online discussion about Democratic VP nominee Tim Walz’s liberal political record is corroborated by:

• Speeches given by Governor Tim Walz's between 2019-2024
• His recent first speech as vice-presidential nominee
• Pattern analysis of his record as a Congress member from 2007-2019

Online discourse and an analysis of previous speeches, determining Walz’s historical rhetoric and policy focus, confirms voter perceptions of his left-leaning platform. The analysis shows a clear shift toward more liberal and progressive positions during Walz’s political career.

In early speeches and actions, Walz took a more centrist, bipartisan approach, particularly in his early years as governor and his time in Congress. He emphasized working across the aisle on issues like veterans' affairs, agriculture, and rural economic development—areas traditionally seen as more moderate or centrist. Throughout his tenure, however, there is a noticeable leftward shift, particularly in his stance on social issues, economic policy, environmental concerns, and public safety.

How Voters View Walz

Current voter understanding of Tim Walz is shaped by significant online criticism of his “extremely liberal” politics. People discuss allegations of "stolen valor" for exaggerating his military rank and combat experience. This leads to widespread negative sentiment.

Discussions about how he handled civil unrest in Minnesota and COVID lockdowns also draw ire. Voters accuse Walz of cowardice and authoritarianism for allowing riots to continue unchecked and imposing harsh lockdowns in 2020.

His association with controversial figures like Imam Asad Zaman further fuels negative perceptions, raising questions about his judgment. Criticism extends to his stance on gun control, where detractors argue he lies about his military background to advocate for stricter gun laws.

Allegations of fraud in child welfare programs under his oversight have also damaged his reputation, generating significant distrust in his leadership. Overall, discussions place Walz under intense public scrutiny. Voters discuss him mentioning dishonesty, poor leadership, and questionable associations.

Voters also recognize that Walz has increasingly championed progressive causes, particularly in areas like LGBTQ rights, racial justice, and abortion rights. His strong support for protecting access to sex change surgeries for minors, codifying abortion rights, and banning conversion therapy aligns him closely with the progressive base.

Economically, Walz advocates for larger, tax-funded investments in public education, affordable housing, and paid family and medical leave—hallmark issues for progressives. He also backs required free school meals and a child tax credit aimed at reducing child poverty, further signaling his alignment with progressive economic policies.

More Money Doesn’t Improve Education

MIG Reports analysis shows discussions regarding educational policies, such as the free school breakfast and lunch programs, are politically divided. Some praise Walz's efforts as necessary support systems for children. But more conservative voters denounce the program, which mandates free meals regardless of family income, as a socialist overreach and an unnecessary use of tax dollars. This division reflects the broader ideological battle playing out in the narrative surrounding Walz’s governance.

In speeches, Walz consistently emphasizes Education and Families as central to his agenda. He advocates creating opportunities for children and supporting family structures. However, his discussions lack a detailed education strategy, with little specificity on how proposed investments will be managed or how they will correlate with long-term economic growth.

The absence of a cohesive educational and economic strategy raises concerns about the effectiveness and sustainability of his policies. The Casey Foundation ranked Minnesota education #7 in 2021, #9 in 2022, and #18 in 2023 despite increases in public funding. AP News also reported in December of 2023 that Walz’s free school meal program was costing more than expected and, as a result, was unsustainable for the state budget.

2020 Riots Still Anger Americans

Voter discussions on Public Safety are rife with allegations that Walz allowed and even encouraged chaos during the George Floyd protests in 2020. People accuse him of failing to deploy the National Guard to control the riots. They say he instead directed police efforts toward enforcing stringent lockdown rules.

Americans view Walz as a leader who prioritized extreme lockdown enforcement over public safety amid civil unrest. There is significant criticism of his COVID response, with accusations of unjust and overly restrictive measures. The most discussed topics revolve around his enforcement methods—like a snitch line—during lockdowns. Sentiment across these discussions is negative, with frequent comparisons to authoritarian practices and criticisms of his broader political ideology and governance style.

In public speeches, Walz’s approach to Public Safety focuses on gun control measures like red flag laws and universal background checks. These positions align him progressive views on gun limitations.

Foreign Policy and Security Issues

In discussions about Walz’s Foreign Policy, people mention his historical affiliations and travel to China. Voters highlight his extensive travel history to the country, accusing him of having ties to the Chinese Communist Party. These accusations are often linked to a broader distrust of Walz’s foreign policy positions and potential influences on his domestic policy decisions. Sentiment around these allegations is largely negative, often intensifying calls against his candidacy.

Top keywords mentioned with Tim Walz regarding Security Issues include:

• Hamas
• Muslim cleric
• Military service
• Stolen valor
• Antisemitic
• Hitler

The overall sentiment is negative, as people question his honesty, associations, and ability to handle security-related issues effectively.

Walz’s Rhetoric is Increasingly Leftist

Current public discussion of Walz's various policy positions is limited. However, MIG Reports analysis of his speech content confirms general voter perceptions of Walz’s increasingly left-leaning positions.

Healthcare

Walz’s speeches frequently mention Healthcare, initially focusing on access and affordability. Later in his political career, his advocacy expands to emphasize mental health and abortion rights. Despite this, Walz's speeches lack in-depth proposals for healthcare reforms. This gap in his healthcare strategy suggests a reluctance to tackle politically divisive issues, which could be attributed to his tendency to cater to the far left.

Bipartisanship

Over time, Walz's rhetoric shifts, with Bipartisanship giving way to a more direct, occasionally confrontational tone, particularly toward Republican policies. This shift indicates a stronger alignment with progressive stances, especially on issues like climate change, gun control, and social equity.

However, his speeches often omit issues critical to voters such as Immigration Policy, an increasingly significant topic in national discourse. By neglecting immigration reform and border security, Walz aligns himself with the political left who are often accused of advocating open borders.

Environmental Issues

On Environmental Issues, Walz sets ambitious goals, such as achieving 100% clean energy in Minnesota by 2040. This aligns with broader progressive goals focused on combating climate change and promoting sustainable energy.

His focus on Environmental Justice—how these policies impact marginalized communities—is historically limited. With growing importance in progressive circles, any emerging rhetoric from Walz on environmental justice would indicate continued movement to the left.

Rural Issues

Online conversations about Tim Walz characterize him an an increasingly left-leaning, authoritarian figure. When addressing Rural Issues, Walz tends to focus more on agriculture, with less attention on broader challenges such as rural healthcare access, broadband connectivity, and educational disparities. This narrow focus may suggest a limited understanding of the diverse needs of rural communities, which could hinder his ability to effectively serve these constituencies.

Summary

Voter discussions about Walz feature suspicions of dishonesty, poor leadership during crises, and questionable political associations. Public sentiment trends negatively across these themes, presenting Walz as much more progressive than Democrats claim. Many Democratic voters and political analysts seek to position Walz as a Midwesterner with moderate appeal. However, voter discussions and his own history of political advocacy confirms his strongly progressive allegiances.

Glaring gaps in addressing critical issues like immigration, comprehensive healthcare reform, and rural challenges damage Walz’s image among critical voter groups. People seem to understand that Walz’s track record reveals misalignment with important voter issues in favor of catering to the progressive wing of the Democratic base. As a governor, his impact is often seen as limited, with his successes overshadowed by significant failures.

Public sentiment toward Kamala Harris's presidential campaign has become sharply polarized over allegations of using AI-generated images to fake crowd sizes. Conversations reveal distrust and skepticism, across multiple demographic axes, regarding the authenticity of her campaign strategies and her political stances.

Critics say the Harris campaign relies heavily on media manipulation and social media influence, suggesting her support maybe be more manufactured than genuine. TikTok influencers have claimed they were paid to promote the campaign. Other evidence emerged suggesting rally attendees were paid.

About those Harris crowds.... pic.twitter.com/7O8jL46Uoz

— Matt Braynard (@MattBraynard) August 12, 2024

There are allegations the mainstream media shelters her from scrutiny by not demanding press conferences or in-depth interviews. This critique extends to her running mate, Tim Walz, who people accuse of using deceptive narratives to obfuscate his true political intentions.

• Harris’s approval regarding campaign rallies and fundraising has declined in the last week, slipping from 54% and 53% respectively, to 48% and 46% today.

Campaigns Exchange Accusations

Posts from conservative outlets and individuals are more likely to highlight concerns about astroturfed support and fake images. They use these allegations to demonstrate their belief that the Harris campaign is fundamentally dishonest. Social media accelerates the spread of these views, as even Donald Trump posted about it on Truth Social.

This caused back-and-forth allegations between campaigns as the KamalaHQ X account rebutted Trump’s accusations. The Harris campaign also claimed Trump’s rallies are less packed than Harris’s, causing arguments about the pettiness of these political strategies.

1) This is an actual photo of a 15,000-person crowd for Harris-Walz in Michigan

2) Trump has still not campaigned in a swing state in over a week... Low energy? pic.twitter.com/VgTfoMAcuk

— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) August 11, 2024

Meanwhile at @realdonaldtrump’s rally... https://t.co/uZ73w1de7D pic.twitter.com/lhCZvG4KxF

— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) August 10, 2024

There is still some question about whether it is proven the Harris campaign used doctored images. But as with many issues in partisan politics, many choose the narrative and perspective they prefer, without legitimizing any of the opposition’s claims to evidence. While there is significant ire directed at the Harris campaign for being “fake” and “phony,” some on the right still argue it’s an unproductive controversy.

It damages Trump's campaign to claim something is AI when it clearly isn’t. Call me a sellout if you want, but I don't want Trump to lose over this trivial narrative about crowd sizes. He’s surrounded by bad advisors who are pushing this nonsense. We should be focusing on…

— Vivek Ganapathy Ramaswamy (parody) (@VivekRammaswamy) August 11, 2024

General Disbelief in Harris’s Authenticity

Claims about inauthenticity from Harris campaign communications extends to how Americans view her as a politician. Many criticize her communication style and public visibility, saying she relies heavily on scripts and canned remarks to mask her lack of knowledge. People accuse her of being disingenuous and phony, further cementing perceptions that she is not a competent politician.

Harris supporters downplay allegations of faked images and inauthenticity. They instead focus on the "joy" and “vibes” of the campaign, praising her as a refreshing alternative to Trump. They claim to support her policies, though many cannot articulate what those policies are. These voters often frame criticisms as partisan attacks, saying opposing Trump takes precedence over accusations about campaign tactics.

“Why are ya’ll voting for Kamala Harris?”

“I want to keep access to my bank accounts. I would like to keep making money, I don’t want to be some man’s object I really don’t. The whole thing with Project 2025 is terrifying.” pic.twitter.com/Lkb6XJLHp9

— TENET Media (@watchTENETnow) August 10, 2024

Supporters insist the enthusiasm and turnout for Harris are genuine. These proponents highlight the presence of witnesses, journalists, and photographers at her events as evidence. They call accusations a desperate tactic by opponents to undermine Harris’s rising popularity, claiming fear and defensiveness from Republicans.

Demographic Reactions

The demographic breakdown further complicates Harris’s image. Older voters tend to be more critical of her, emphasizing fears about her socialist tendencies and lack of transparency. They invoke instances of Harris “flip-flopping” on issues, saying she merely seeks to garner favor. For these voters, use of AI-altered images is indicative of a broader pattern of manipulation and dishonesty.

Younger voters are more split. Some prefer to praise Harris’s progressive policies but are also wary of the integrity issues these allegations present. Many younger voters raise questions about digital ethics and authenticity. These topics resonate strongly with a generation attuned to digital literacy, media manipulation, and the implications of technology on politics.

Gender also plays a role in shaping perceptions. Female voters, especially those identifying as feminists, often support Harris for her symbolic significance as a potential female president. Yet, they are not immune to concerns about the campaign's authenticity. Many female voters express a desire for a transparent and honest campaign, fearing any proven deceit undermines broader efforts for gender equality in leadership.

Online conversations suggest the issue of child trafficking is becoming politicized with partisan disagreements about Biden-Harris open borders policies. Voters express disgust at what is occurring at the border, viewing a leadership change as increasingly necessary. In states like Arizona, Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake is voicing urgent voter concerns about cartel activity and drug and child trafficking in a way that Democrats are not. This is gaining her approval among increasingly concerned Americans.

Kari Lake, Change Candidate

Kari Lake is a Republican running for Kyrsten Sinema’s Senate seat in Arizona. She is often mentioned in conversations about the border and child trafficking as someone who sincerely cares. Voter sentiment is overwhelmingly positive toward Lake on these issues as frustration with Democrats mounts.

Lake regularly speaks out about border issues voters prioritize, while her opponent, Ruben Gallego, is deafeningly silent.

.@KariLake: “The biggest Human Smuggling, Drug Trafficking, Child Trafficking operation is underway here in Arizona...

and our Government is partnering with the Cartels. Yes, I said that.”@BrandonStraka @RealWalkAway pic.twitter.com/bNuICYhduR

— Kari Lake (@KariLake) June 14, 2022

Voters believe in her commitment to implementing stronger border security measures that will protect children and combat cartel trafficking. Conversations mention her with phrases like “close the borders to prevent more human trafficking” and “protect children from all forms of abuse.” Voters in Arizona and nationwide support candidates like Kari Lake who promise stringent reforms.

Lake, who is known as a fighter who does not back down, uses this to her advantage on cartel and trafficking issues. People view her as dedicated, willing to fight, and genuinely caring. Public sentiment toward Lake's border efforts is overwhelmingly positive.

There is a strong belief that she prioritizes eradicating child trafficking, unlike her Democratic counterparts. Many convey appreciation for her vocal stance and proposed policies aimed at tackling this issue directly.

The narrative around Lake is one of hope and support, portraying her as a figure willing to take robust action where others have faltered. Discussions about Lake reveal optimism, portraying her as a proactive leader capable of implementing strong border policies Democrats are unwilling to enact.

Outrage and Urgency

Outrage dominates discussions about the Biden-Harris administration's border policies, particularly regarding negligence and dismissal of child trafficking. Voters regularly talk of “open borders,” voicing frustration with the administration’s unwillingness to enforce border security measures.

Americans accuse the administration of exacerbating drug trafficking, human trafficking—specifically child trafficking—by ignoring border laws. Sentiment is overwhelmingly negative, with criticism directed at Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in her role as "border czar."

Accusations of incompetence and failure dominate conversations. People link Democrat failures to rises in crime, drug-related deaths, and unchecked border crossings. Sen. Chuck Grassley is drafting a Congressional Review Act to block the Biden-Harris administration from further enabling dangerous trafficking practices.

The connection between drug and human trafficking is another major concern. Voters express alarm and urgency about fentanyl and trafficking children streaming across the border via Mexican cartels.

An increasingly dangerous fentanyl supply in the U.S. generates fear across political lines as more Americans are impacted by drug addiction, overdose, and death. Many also attribute increased drug trafficking to lax border policies.

Rampant trafficking amplifies critiques of the Biden-Harris approach to border security. Voters demand more stringent actions to combat both drug and human trafficking.

DOJ sued HHS contractor Southwest Key 4 repeatedly turning blind eye 2 employee sex abuse of migrant children HHS’ UC Program Rule adds 2 the problem by weakening employee vetting / HHS even tried 2 block SW Key frm answering my oversight requests Congress must seek reforms

— Chuck Grassley (@ChuckGrassley) July 20, 2024

Failing Upward

Discussions reveal a broader theme of political responsibility and blame, with voters divided along partisan lines. Terms like "Democrat policies," "Republican solutions," and NGOs frequently appear. Politics divides many opinions on how best to address border issues and trafficking.

Partisan debate intensifies the emotional engagement and urgency in public discourse. Voters say they feel betrayed by the Biden-Harris administration's failures. Further complicating this issue is the involvement of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Accusations emerge of taxpayer-funded groups enabling Democratic border policies voters are starting to abhor.

EXCLUSIVE: I spent four months investigating the web of NGOs facilitating the Biden Administration's migrant crisis. These taxpayer-funded groups are pulling in billions of dollars and lavishing themselves with salaries and bonuses.

Here's how they're cashing in. 🧵

— Maddie Rowley (@Maddie_Rowley_) May 13, 2024

Some discuss the broader socio-economic impacts of immigration policies like inflation and resource scarcity, adding to their frustration. This deepens negative sentiment toward VP Harris, whose role as the Border Czar places responsibility at her feet. A lack of evidence that she took any action and financial support for NGOs from the Biden-Harris administration, will likely worsen sentiment.

On Aug. 6, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris announced Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate. Many voters speculate Harris’s strategy was aimed at solidifying support with voters in the Midwest. Democrats are emphasizing both progressive and moderate credentials to appeal across the party’s spectrum.

MIG Reports data shows headwinds for Harris in the three days following Walz’s announcement as the Democratic VP pick:

• Harris continues to lose ground nationally against Donald Trump
• Walz’s individual support dropped from leading J.D. Vance by 3%, to trailing him by 1%.

Negativity Toward Gov. Tim Walz

On the ideological left, there is a limited amount of support for Harris-Walz. Leftists among these groups dissect Harris's campaign decisions for their shaky alignment with progressive values. Progressives express skepticism about her commitment to systemic change, often pointing to her past as a prosecutor and her perceived establishment ties.

Democrats and progressives who approve of Walz express hope that he can strengthen Harris’s appeal to rural and Midwestern voters while reinforcing progressive policies. However, this hope seems largely negated by voter sentiment in Midwest states like Wisconsin.

• Despite an initial boost on Aug. 6, Kamala Harris’s approval in Wisconsin has since dropped to net -1% relative to her support prior to adding Walz to the ticket.
• In Ohio, Harris saw a 4% bump with her VP announcement, which dropped back down to 46% in the following days.
• Similarly in Michigan Harris has not held her VP bump, dropping back down from 49% on Aug. 6 to 47% today.

Moderates and centrists are a challenge for Harris, creating a need to prevent herself from being perceived as far-left. Critical issues like the economy, border, and national security draw sharp negativity from important voter groups.

Despite the Harris campaign attempting to frame Walz as a moderate who appeals to both progressives and centrists, MIG Reports data shows online sentiment is predominantly negative. The campaign’s framing effort is often met with skepticism and outright rejection. Dissatisfied voters are quick to highlight Walz’s record as extremely far left.

Many Midwestern voters also highlight geographic and cultural rifts. They claim coastal democrats have misunderstood Midwestern moderates. They view Walz’s policies as reshaping Minnesota into a facsimile of California's liberal agenda. This comparison highlights growing divides on the left between far left progressives and moderate and blue-collar Democrats.

Top issues causing negativity toward Walz include:

• Walz role in allowing and possibly abetting BLM riots in Minneapolis in 2020
• His position on transgender issues and child sex-change surgeries
• Concerning ties Walz has with China and travel there as a teacher
• Widespread allegations of stolen valor
• His extremely progressive immigration policies
• Walz’s poor fiscal record of government over-spending in Minnesota
• His stringent enforcement of 2020 COVID lockdowns

National approval for Walz has been volatile in the last month. In mid-July, Walz saw approval highs of 48% and a low of 37%.

• Since being chosen as the Democratic VP candidate, Walz's approval has dropped from 49% to 46%.
• A month ago, online mentions of Tim Walz only averaged 38 per day. With his announcement as Harris’ running mate, mentions spiked to 23,936, dropping back to around 10,000 in the following days.

Voter Group Reactions

Democrats

Among Democrats, many highlight Tim Walz's legislative achievements and progressive credentials. Proponents celebrate his moves to provide universal free school meals, legalize cannabis, enact carbon-free electricity mandates, and establish paid family leave policies.

Walz's supporters argue his executive experience and progressive policies align with Kamala Harris's vision for America. They spotlight his efforts in sectors like education, climate change, and healthcare.

National Democratic figures like Nancy Pelosi and David Axelrod have defended Walz, indicating his acceptance among influential party members. However, these support pillars do not translate to more moderate Democratic voters.

Moderate Democrats express concern about Walz’s progressive track record. They worry about the backlash against his handling of BLM protests and his controversial COVID "snitch line." Walz's advocacy for defunding police and support for youth gender surgeries also alienates centrist Democrats in swing states who view these policies as too radical.

Republicans

Predictably, Republican and conservative voters are sharply critical of Walz. They decry his role during BLM protests in Minnesota, accusing him of allowing riots and chaos. Conservatives view Walz as overly radical, emphasizing his ties to socialist policies and his progressive stance on LGBTQ issues.

Republicans suggest Walz solidifies a leftward shift on the Democratic ticket. This, they argue, is contrary to the values of mainstream America.

Much of the discourse among Republicans—with growing media acknowledgement—outlines allegations of repeated stolen valor by Walz. Evidence has emerged that Wal retired from the National Guard to avoid deployment and misrepresented his rank and service record. This scandal elicits strong negativity from veterans, voters who value support for the U.S. military, and moderate demographics who emphasize valor and honor in service.

Independents and moderates

Some Independents appreciate Walz's tangible policy achievements and his Midwestern roots. They hope this can help the Democratic ticket gain traction in critical swing states. However, support among those who would have appreciated Walz's military background wavers with more information about his alleged stolen valor.

Many are also concerned about how he managed 2020 protests and view his policies as too extreme. His COVID lockdown policies also generate disapproval—especially in discussion about creating a "snitch line" to report anyone violating lockdown orders. These are major sticking points for moderates and Independents, could jeopardize support.

Geographic Voter Groups

Geographically, the reaction to Walz varies. In Minnesota and neighboring Midwestern states, his candidacy elicits strong responses, both positive and negative. These regions have witnessed his governorship firsthand, causing many to express dissatisfaction.

In contrast, coastal states inclined towards more progressive policies seem to respond more favorably to Walz. They align with progressive values but believe Walz could shore up moderate appeal.

In traditionally conservative regions, especially the South and parts of the Midwest, criticism reigns. These regions frame Walz’s policies as emblematic of excessive government intervention and radicalism.

• In swing states, Walz does not meaningfully boost Kamala Harris’s support.
• Since Walz’s announcement as VP pick, Kamala Harris has lost ground against Donald Trump in swing states, going from a 50%-46% Trump lead to 52%-44%.

Voters commenting on the Senate race in Wisconsin between Democratic incumbent Tammy Baldwin and a soon-decided Republican challenger are mostly discussing the economy and establishment politics.

Republican challenger Eric Hovde is the favorite to win the GOP Senate primary on Aug. 13. With the economy and immigration two of the top voter issues, MIG Reports data indicates Hovde leads Baldwin with 52% support to Baldwin’s 48% as of Aug. 9.

Against this backdrop, conversations among Wisconsin voters focus on:

• The impact of illegal immigration on the economy
• Workers whose jobs are being threatened by competition from migrants
• Jobs threatened by changes in certain industries
• Anti-establishment sentiments among Wisconsinites

Establishment Workhorse vs Outsider

Baldwin's political career started in 1986 when she was 24. She served six consecutive terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, prior to her Senate election win in 2012. Her political career has been almost as long as President Joe Biden’s, roiling the growing number of anti-establishment voters.

Baldwin is strongly aligned with progressive values and the Biden-Harris administration, voting with them 95.5% of the time. This is a prominent theme generating criticism from those who are unhappy with national politics.

Critics link her to social and economic woes like:

• Rising costs from inflation
• Homelessness
• The decline of American cities
• Concerns about international conflicts
• Rampant illegal immigration
• Drug addiction and deaths

Voters also criticize her for being disconnected from her constituents. They see her lifestyle and financial interests as an indication she favors the wealthy over the working-class. Wisconsin’s economic situation is another focal point, with mixed opinions on Baldwin’s role in recent manufacturing gains and broader economic trends.

In contrast, Eric Hovde is seen as a political outsider bringing "fresh perspective" and "new ideas." He appeals to voters who are disillusioned with traditional politics. Many view Hovde's lack of establishment ties as an advantage. They say it allows him to challenge the status quo and offer innovative solutions.

Hovde's anti-establishment stance, emphasizing independence, anti-corruption, and reform, resonates with many Wisconsinites. They want to disrupt political cronyism and inefficiency, looking to Hovde for greater transparency and accountability.

Economic Pain for Wisconsinites

Inflation is a prominent topic as voters criticize government spending and economic policies. Wisconsinites express concerns about the rising cost of living, specifically citing high prices for essentials such as gas and groceries. Some blame the Biden-Harris administration for uncontrolled spending that exacerbates inflation. Others argue inflation is a global issue not solely impacted by domestic policies.

Sentiment toward Eric Hovde leans positive on the economy. Conversations are growing about his passion for building homes for families and children in need. Many see this as positive and relatable for those facing economic hardship. There is some skepticism of Hovde’s background in finance, though many see it as a positive. They appreciate his return to Wisconsin despite living an affluent life in southern California.

Voters also talk about taxes, debating the implications of tax cuts and increases. More conservative voters advocate for tax cuts to stimulate the economy and reduce financial strain on families. Left leaning voters call for higher taxes on the wealthy and large corporations to address fiscal deficits and income inequality.

Sentiment Trends and Voter Impact

On inflation and tax evasion scandals, sentiment is extremely negative. People are frustrated with current economic policies and political figures they view as corrupt. This coincides with wider anti-establishment sentiment in Wisconsin. Voters want tax cuts, deregulation, and fiscal conservatism to combat economic challenges.

Undecided and moderate voters seem particularly influenced by discussions about practical economic impacts. Concerns about day-to-day expenses, fairness in taxation, and financial transparency are central to their decision-making process. These voters display a tendency to seek balanced and pragmatic solutions, rather than extreme partisan positions.

Inflation and taxes have sustained voter attention over time as fundamental concerns. Temporary spikes in discussion often occur around specific events or revelations, such as scandals involving financial misconduct by candidates. However, these spikes tend to increase a consistently high discussion volume.

State of GDP

In 2024, Wisconsin's manufacturing sector remains the largest contributor to GDP, generating $55.19 billion, but is experiencing a decline of 1.3%. The real estate and rental and leasing sectors follow, contributing $38.39 billion with minimal growth of 0.2%. Healthcare and social assistance is grew 1.6%, contributing $32.02 billion, reflecting increased demand for healthcare services.

High-growth sectors include:

• Professional, scientific, and technical services: 6.3% growth rate
• Arts, entertainment, and recreation: 11.3% growth rate, likely due to a post-COVID rebound

Challenges are evident in sectors like finance and insurance. These face a significant decline of 1.7%, potentially due to regulatory changes or market saturation. Wholesale trade is also experiencing a decline of 1.0%, likely influenced by broader economic trends impacting supply chains.

Employment Sector Trends

The employment landscape in Wisconsin is diverse, with healthcare and social assistance employing 450,155 people, modest 0.2% growth. Manufacturing employs 446,288 people but is experiencing a slight decline of 0.3%. Retail trade, with 392,305 employees, is growing by 0.9%.

Key growth sectors include:

Administration, Business Support, and Waste Management Services:

• Employs 215,582 people
• Significant growth of 2.9%

Transportation and Warehousing:

• Employs 195,575 people
• Growth of 2.3%

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services:

• Employs 172,697 people
• Growth of 2.3%

Information:

• Fastest-growing sector at 4.0%
• Employs 93,381 people

Sectors like accommodation and food services (239,268 employees) and construction (156,524 employees) are seeing slight declines. The finance and insurance sector is also down by 0.4%, despite employing 171,785 workers. Other services (except public administration) and wholesale trade show minimal changes, with growth rates of -0.6% and 0.6%, respectively.

Prioritizing Party Over Posterity

Wisconsin voters are also concerned about family issues like education. They discuss the need for increased funding and better resources for schools, saying this is essential for high-quality education. However, the public is divided on the best way to achieve these goals.

Eric Hovde has approval from those supporting local control and accountability. His outsider status and focus on reform resonates with voters who believe fresh ideas and local leadership are crucial to addressing education challenges.

Hovde's approach contrasts sharply with Tammy Baldwin’s, whose support for COVID lockdowns draws criticism. People say she approved of destroying social cohesion, the economy, and children's education. Her alignment with broader government intervention is criticized by those who feel these measures exacerbate existing problems.

Lockdowns Damaged Education

Many criticize Baldwin and other pro-lockdown politicians for dealing a significant blow to education. They point out COVID restrictions negatively impacted academic proficiency among Wisconsin students. There were significant declines in both English Language Arts (ELA) and Math.

Pre-COVID proficiency levels in ELA and Math were 42.4% and 43.8%, respectively, in 2018.These figures dropped sharply post-2020, hitting a low of 33.7% for ELA and 33.6% for Math in 2021.

Although proficiency partially recovered by 2023, reaching 39.2% in ELA and 41.1% in Math, these levels remain below pre-COVID standards. Lockdowns exacerbated existing achievement gaps related to race and socioeconomic status. This created an urgent need for targeted interventions to support recovery and close these disparities.

With Kamala Harris and Tim Walz now established as the top of the Democratic ticket, immigration conversations are heating up. The primary focus of discussions among voters are Harris-Walz border policies and actions related to illegal immigration. This is a top issue for voters in 2024 and Harris’s track record as Border Czar during the Biden administration does not bode well for her campaign.

What Americans are Saying

Top conversations revolve around:

• Illegal immigrant crossings
• Driver’s licenses for illegals
• Sanctuary state issues
• Open borders under Kamala
• The halted border wall

Many voters highlight that both Harris and Walz support lenient policies on illegal immigration. Walz in particular is catching heat for granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. People despise this policy, saying it undermines border security, encourages illegal entry, and threatens election integrity. Voters regularly accuse Harris of condoning open borders, suggesting she intentionally inhibits border restrictions and controls.

The narrative around sanctuary states is particularly contentious, with many arguing they prioritize illegal immigrants over the safety and interests of American citizens. Voters also associate these policies with higher crime rates and stress on state resources. Additional critiques target Harris policies for eroding safety and security. Voters allege increased crimes committed by illegal immigrants compound negative effects on American communities.

Voters Dread a Harris-Walz Border

Americans express strong negative feelings toward Harris and Walz, associating them with extreme leftist border policies. Harris receives significant criticism for how she handled the border as Vice President.

Walz is also facing backlash for his actions and rhetoric about immigration. People accuse him of replacing the Minnesota flag with a Somali flag. Walz’s statements about investing in ladder factories to help illegal immigrants climb the border wall also draw intense criticism and accusations that he wants to increase illegal immigration.

3 months ago, Minnesota Gov Tim Walz replaced their state flag with a new flag resembling a Somali regional flag.

This is Kamala's VP pick. pic.twitter.com/t7PfqPTl5j

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) August 6, 2024

Radical Tim Walz wants a “ladder factory” to help illegals get easy access into America..

As if enough Americans have not suffered enough.
pic.twitter.com/iG9E6J6i3I

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) August 6, 2024

Voter Impact

Harris and Walz aim to attract Independents and undecided voters away from Trump. They argue inclusive policies, such as issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, contribute to public safety and inclusion. However, data suggests there is mounting resistance from Americans who demand leaders secure the nation's borders.

Many voters on both sides of the political aisle view Harris and Walz's immigration stances as fundamentally opposed to American interests. The moderate voter they seek to draw in often have strong loyalty to U.S. interests—particularly border security.

The juxtaposition of security versus inclusivity likely poses a problem for Democrats among multiple voter groups. Voters continue to affirm that border security is a top issue they expect to influence their voting in 2024.

Bad Leaders Make Bad Decisions

Many people criticize Kamala Harris's track record as "Border Czar," viewing her as a complete failure. Critics accuse her of supporting open borders, being lenient on crime, and wasting public resources. They cite personal anecdotes and news stories to illustrate their concerns about crime and drug trafficking, which Kamala has done nothing about.

Harris supporters praise her intentions to provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and other illegals. They say her efforts facilitate the contributions immigrants make to the economy and labor force.

Criticism toward Walz focuses on his poor executive track record in Minnesota—namely his ties to China and actions during the 2020 George Floyd protests. His comments about illegal immigrants lead people to view him as pandering to non-citizen groups who are fundamentally at odds with American interests.

Accusations that Walz made Minnesota a sanctuary state, offering healthcare, driver's licenses, and free college tuition to illegal immigrants infuriates Americans. They say he prioritizes illegal immigrants over American citizens.

Vice President Kamala Harris’s opaque messaging on policy positions is becoming a point of concern for moderates and Independents. Voter groups like Democrats, Independents, and undecideds will be critical in the 2024 election. How they perceive Kamala Harris’s platform between now and the election will inform their view of her as potential president.

Liberals see her as a progressive leader who will push the country further left, generally supporting the Party candidate no matter what. Moderates are cautious about her policies, worrying the left is correct and wondering about the implications for traditional values and national stability.

• Sentiment toward Harris compared to Trump varies by topic. In the last day, the highest volume discussion topics show Harris low on inflation and border security. 
• Both Trump and Harris have strong approval regarding campaign rallies, presumably from each of their support bases.
• The current economy and border security have not been emphasized in conversations about Trump in the last day, however he sees negativity regarding allegations against him by Democrats.

Ideologies

Liberals see Kamala Harris as a champion of progressive ideals, often highlighting her support for workers' rights, social justice, and climate action. They praise her advocacy for labor unions and perceive her as representing average citizens against elites like Donald Trump. However, some liberals criticize her for not pushing far enough on certain progressive issues like economic equality and healthcare reform.

Moderates often view Harris as leaning too far left, associating her with socialist policies and expressing concern about her potential impact on traditional American values. They are wary of her support for universal healthcare and progressive reforms, fearing these might lead to increased government control.

Discussions about her Jamaican and Indian heritage also play a role. Some question her authenticity while others acknowledge her diverse background as a potential strength.

Security Issues

Liberals generally support Harris's diplomatic approach to security issues, appreciating her efforts to address systemic causes of migration and reduce global tensions. They praise her for securing prisoner releases and engaging in international diplomacy but may criticize her for not going far enough in reforming law enforcement.

Moderates express significant concern about Harris's ability to handle national security issues. They perceive her foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, as inconsistent, leading to distrust. They also associate her with the "defund the police" movement and fear increased crime under her administration.

Economic Issues

Liberals support Harris's economic policies, particularly her focus on climate action, job creation, and reducing inequality. They view her role in passing legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act as a positive step toward economic reform. However, they may want her to be more aggressive in challenging corporate influence and wealth inequality.

Moderates are critical of Harris's economic approach, often blaming her for contributing to inflation and economic instability. They express concern about fiscal irresponsibility and the potential burden on the middle class, fearing higher taxes and government spending under her policies.

Border Security

Liberals view Harris's border security policies as a humane approach to immigration reform. They support her efforts to address the root causes of migration and dismantle Trump-era policies. They praise compassion for illegal immigrants, emphasizing their right to migrate. However, some may criticize her for not being more proactive in pushing for comprehensive reform.

Moderates are furious with Harris's border security legacy, frequently criticizing her role as "Border Czar." They blame her for unchecked illegal immigration and massive security risks. They view her policies as both lenient and enabling to criminals looking to enter the country. Many also have harsh words for the apparent disregard for cartel activity and drug and child trafficking.

Worries about border failures are exacerbated by candidate Harris and her recent VP pick Tim Walz seeming to completely ignore child trafficking issues in favor of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Immigration Issues

Liberals generally support Harris's immigration policies, praising her focus on humane treatment and systemic reform. They appreciate her advocacy for migrant rights but may call for more decisive action against restrictive immigration policies.

Moderates criticize Harris's immigration stance as overly lenient, associating her with increased illegal immigration and national security concerns. They express frustration over her halting deportations and call for stricter controls and decisive actions to curb illegal immigration.

A sense of impending doom in the Middle East and threats of escalating conflicts strike Americans with anxiety and dread. The potential for World War III and tensions between Israel, Iran, Hamas, and the U.S. roils concerns about global stability and geopolitical dynamics. Conversations are not just about distant wars but expose American dread about security at home, America’s power on the world stage, and leadership in the White House.

Geopolitical Concerns

One of the dominant trends in these discussions is fear of all-out war in the Middle East, involving multiple countries. Israel's military actions and the responses from Iran and its allies are taking center stage.

Recent assassinations of key figures such as Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr has intensified these debates, with many users expressing concern over the potential for a broader regional war

U.S. Involvement

The role of the United States is a focal point of these conversations, with many questioning America's involvement and support for Israel. There is significant debate over whether Biden's policies are exacerbating tensions.

The discourse often shifts to criticism of U.S. foreign policy. People criticize inadequacies of diplomatic efforts and the potential consequences of military involvement in the Middle East. Both sides of the political aisle express dissatisfaction with current events.

Fear of Global Conflict

The fear of a potential World War III looms large in American minds. People frequently refer to WW3, Iranian retaliation, and global security, showing anxiety about larger-scale conflict.

Concerns are focused on Iran's potential retaliatory strikes against Israel and the involvement of other regional powers like Hezbollah. The narrative suggests current conflict dynamics are a "runaway train," indicating a loss of control that could have devastating global repercussions.

Sentiment Trends

There are strong emotions driving public discourse on international conflict. Progressives condemn Israeli military tactics, with terms like "genocidal" and "war crimes," reflecting outrage over the situation in Gaza. Pro-Israel voice advocate self-defense against existential threats by Hamas and Hezbollah.

This polarization is accompanied by widespread fear over the increasing possibility of war and the perceived inadequacy of international responses.

Many Americans also criticize the Biden-Harris administration, disapproving of how they are handling the crisis. People view the administration as demonstrating a lack of strength and effectiveness in dealing with adversaries like Iran and its proxies. People question who is really in charge of the country, if anyone.

Despite the polarization, there is a shared hope of avoiding conflict. Voters are frustrated with ongoing violence and the financial costs to America, calling to de-escalate tensions. The sentiment trends indicate a mixture of dread, urgency, and a desire for effective solutions to navigate the complex geopolitical landscape.

Impact on Voters

The ongoing conflict and perceived mishandling by the current administration have eroded public confidence in U.S. leadership. This will likely impact voter sentiment, particularly among those who prioritize national security and foreign policy in their electoral decisions. The criticism directed at the Biden-Harris administration also leads to calls for a change in leadership or policy direction.

Fears of escalating conflicts and the potential for World War III will likely influence voter priorities. Especially if things remain heightened or even worsen in the next few months. A possible shift toward Trump may come with emphasis on strong defense measures and effective international relations. Foreign conflicts are shaping the debate on U.S. foreign policy, as public sentiment is increasingly critical of perceived alliances and interventions that may not align with national interests.

Recent online discussions about the American job market show widespread concerns and fear about the nation's economic health. As unemployment rates reach their highest since October 2021, public discourse has become dominated by anxiety over a recession, despair a stock market crashes, dissatisfaction with the Biden administration, and debates over labor market dynamics.

This analysis discusses the intricacies of how Americans are grappling with the current economic landscape, the perceived impacts of political decisions, and the implications for future voter behavior.

Why Americans are Worried

There is heightened anxiety across all groups surrounding the unemployment rate, which has surged to 4.3%—its highest since October 2021. This statistic has catalyzed debates about economic mismanagement and Biden-Harris policy failures.

Widespread references to the Sahm Rule underscore public apprehension about an impending recession. Terms like "unemployment rate," "recession," and "Bidenomics" flood discussions. There is a profound skepticism toward the economic strategies currently in place.

Another pain point for Americans is the trend of job growth being almost exclusively among foreign-born workers versus native-born Americans. This further fuels concerns about economic equity, labor market competitiveness, and even border security.

Emotional or Economic Depression

The national mood on the economy and jobs is overwhelmingly negative. People fear economic and global instability and are disillusioned with unrelenting claims from the Biden-Harris administration that they have succeeded on the economy.

"I cured the economy."

— Joe Biden (six days ago)pic.twitter.com/SMsXKVfljw

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) August 5, 2024

The terms "Bidenomics" and “Kamalanomics”are thrown disparagingly at the administration, highlighting the extreme displeasure of voters. People are frustrated with wage stagnation, job losses, and rising national debt.

Nostalgia for Trump’s administration and better economic success for average Americans amplifies the negativity. People compare Trump’s economy, low unemployment rates, and robust job creation to a current feeling of hanging over the edge of a cliff. This sentiment extends to dissatisfaction with monetary policy decisions, such as the Federal Reserve's handling of interest rates, which many believe exacerbates economic woes.

Voter Impact

Negative feelings about the economy have significant implications for voter decisions and behavior. With elections on the horizon, the public's discontent about economic policies could influence political dynamics, potentially swaying voter preferences.

Discussions often speculate on the potential outcomes of a Harris administration. People use terms like "Kamala economic crash," discussing recent market turmoil and economic instability. There are clear anxieties about what the economy would look like under Harris's governance.

Voters will likely consider current economic indicators and their impact on everyday life as they make electoral decisions. The dialogue reveals people are deeply concerned about their futures and eager for leadership that prioritizes job security and effective economic management.

Broader Economic Concerns

Beyond employment, discussions touch on worries about broader economic issues such as rising inflation, stock market crashes, escalating national debt, the cost of potential wars. The increased unemployment rate has led to significant downturns in major stock indices like the NASDAQ and S&P 500, adding to financial anxieties.

Americans connect these concerns to global geopolitical tensions and fiscal policies, reflecting a complex web of factors contributing to economic distress. The public's call for policy change is accompanied by a demand for transparency and accountability in economic reporting, as evidenced by skepticism surrounding job report revisions.