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

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

What Texans are Saying About the Border

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

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

Approval for Texas Leaders

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

Reactions to Biden Administration Policy

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

Solutions the People Want

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

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

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

New Hampshire - What Happened

The New Hampshire GOP primary demonstrated a clear victory for Donald Trump, with his total votes exceeding the entire vote count of the 2016 primary.

Trump's overwhelming victory can be attributed to his strong ground effort and appeal among registered GOP voters. He won 74% of the registered GOP vote, demonstrating his enduring popularity within the Republican party. Conversely, Haley's campaign impressed with independents, winning 65% of their support. This suggests that Haley's message appeals to a broader base, potentially including some Democrats.

While it's hard to ascertain from the data provided whether Democrats were supporting Haley, her strong performance among independents suggests some cross-over appeal. Similarly, it's unclear which candidate attracted libertarian voters, but Trump's strong showing among registered GOP voters suggests he may have been their preferred choice.

What Was On The Ballot?

Without specific polling data on the top issues for Trump and Haley voters, it is difficult to determine what their key priorities were. However, given Trump's past campaigns and his base of support, it is reasonable to guess that issues like immigration, trade, and a strong economy were likely important to his supporters. Haley's supporters, on the other hand, may have been more attracted to her international experience and more traditional conservative stances.

It’s also worth noting that some comments suggest a portion of Libertarian voters might have supported Trump over Haley. This is indicative of Trump’s appeal to anti-establishment voters who prioritize issues such as individual liberties and small government, which are hallmarks of Libertarian ideology. The top three issues appear to be:

Trump

• Anti-establishment
• More conservative governance
• America-first policies

Haley

• Anti-Trump, Pro-Establishment
• Traditional GOP
• Challenging Trump’s control

However, there is a growing call among some voters for Haley to drop out of the primary. The argument is that the money being spent on her campaign could be better utilized in other crucial races, such as those for the U.S. Senate, House of Representatives, or gubernatorial seats. Trump is running unopposed in the Nevada Caucus and presumed to win all 26 delegates.

Nevada - What’s Next

Donald Trump's campaign has been marked by significant successes, making him the first non-sitting Republican candidate to win both the Iowa and New Hampshire. His campaign has effectively mobilized his base and resonated with voters, resulting in tangible victories. Nikki Haley's campaign appears to be facing challenges, despite a surge of Democratic votes in the Republican primary in New Hampshire. This perception of Haley as a 'swamp shill', as reflected in public sentiments, has also been detrimental to her campaign.

Trump vs Haley (Nevada)

How Do Voters See It?

Negative sentiments surrounding Haley's campaign have been increasing, with many believing that she has little chance of beating Trump and that her continued presence in the race is damaging to the GOP. These sentiments are further fueled by the belief that she will likely lose the primary in South Carolina, her home state.

In contrast, Trump's campaign is surrounded by mostly positive themes, with supporters praising his leadership and his potential to secure a landslide victory. Despite some criticisms about his focus on loyalty, his support levels seem to be consistently high.

Raising Trump support

• Strong leadership
• America-first policies
• Electability in November

Lowering Trump support

• Threat of potential indictments
• Perceived shift from traditional GOP values

Raising Haley support

• Fresh start in the GOP

Lowering Haley support

• Endorsing candidates against Trump
• Divisiveness within the party, Democrat in disguise
• Refusal to drop out

The New Hampshire GOP primary is garnering significant attention with key players including former President Donald Trump and former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. The endorsement of Trump by Ron DeSantis seems to have contributed to Trump's edge in the race. Recent polling identifies Donald Trump receiving around 50% support, while MIG reporting is currently at 59%

Heading into the vote, Trump seems to have the support of the conservative base of the Republican party, while Haley seems to be the preferred choice for moderate Republicans and those dissatisfied with both Trump and Biden. There is also a significant percentage of the population open to a third-party candidate, as indicated by the readiness of the No Labels Unity Party to put forth a candidate if Haley does not get the GOP nomination.

Donald Trump's campaign appears to be gathering momentum, after Florida Governor Ron DeSantis suspended his presidential campaign and endorsed Trump. Many have speculated that this endorsement may cement Trump's standing in the race. The endorsement was hinted at by Rep. Matt Gaetz during a Trump event in Manchester, NH, which has generated much chatter in the political circuit.

On the other hand, Nikki Haley's campaign has been characterized by a mix of support and criticism. Haley, a self-proclaimed globalist, has been criticized for her association with the World Economic Forum (WEF) and their Agenda 2030, which some fear could massively limit personal freedoms. Her endorsement by Asa Hutchinson has also led to accusations that she is backed by elites.

Top Ten Discussions

1. The endorsement of Trump by Ron DeSantis.
2. The perceived bias in certain polls favoring Haley
3. The controversial tactics employed by MAGA extremists.
4. The potential of a third-party candidate by the No Labels Unity Party.
5. The public sentiment towards each candidate.
6. The potential of Haley beating Biden in the general election.
7. The divide among Republican voters.
8. Trump and Biden's close competition within the margin of error in some polls.
9. The possibility of a Biden/Trump rematch in the upcoming election.
10. The speculation about the potential failure of either Trump or Biden in certain areas.

Trump's recent historical win in Iowa seems to have bolstered his support in New Hampshire as well, with many staunch Republicans backing him as the only viable candidate who can beat President Biden in the general election. There's a strong sentiment among these supporters that Trump is the true defender of the American Constitution and the values it represents. Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis, and Nikki Haley have distinct campaign narratives and differing levels of support, which have been shaped by various factors, including their performances in the Iowa Caucus and the endorsement of Trump by Vivek Ramaswamy. Interestingly, there’s continued conversation of final weeks’ campaign spending and effect in the Iowa caucus.

• Trump’s campaign spent $3.5 million on advertising, securing 54,783 votes, which translates to $63.88 per vote. This efficient campaign spending demonstrates Trump's enduring popularity within the party.
• Ron DeSantis, meanwhile, spent $6.1 million for 22,803 votes in the Iowa Caucus, equating to $268 per vote.
• Nikki Haley’s campaign spent a significant $7.8 million in the Iowa Caucus to secure 20,446 votes, equating to $381.49 per vote.

Looking back at the results from the Iowa caucus, we see a trend of strong support for anti-establishment figures. If this sentiment carries over into New Hampshire, it could benefit Trump, who has long positioned himself as an outsider fighting against the "establishment." Trump’s support received an overnight bump of approximately 7% and is back to over 50%, mirroring his results of the Iowa Caucus. DeSantis, with his strong stance on state rights versus federal overreach, could also capitalize on this sentiment. Haley, however, may struggle if the New Hampshire electorate continues to lean anti-establishment.

What’s On The Ballot?

Online sentiment in New Hampshire indicates several topics which either increases support for Trump or decreases support for Haley, DeSantis:

• Globalism, Trade, and Foreign Relations - negatively impacting Haley due to perceived support for the World Economic Forum's Agenda 2030 and soft on China.
• Immigration - Online discussions suggest that immigration might be a key issue for voters, which may favor Trump more despite perception of Haley's toughness on the border,
• Candidate Credibility - Voters appear to be assessing the candidates on their perceived ability to effectively lead and manage the nation, as evident in the criticism of Haley and DeSantis.
• Anti-Trump, Pro-Establishment Sentiment - For some voters, their support for Haley seems to be driven more by their dislike for Trump than their liking for Haley.
• Evangelicals & Non-College Educated - Haley's lack of appeal to this demographic and Ramaswamy's appeal to this group suggests that their concerns and preferences are shaping the race.
• Political strategies - Voters are attentive to each candidate's strategy, as shown by the commentary on Haley's decision not to participate in the debates unless Trump does.

Specific issues may vary between states and individuals, but there is a clear sense of dissatisfaction with the current administration and a desire for change among the GOP primary voters in both Iowa and New Hampshire. Similar to the Iowa voters, there is a sense of dissatisfaction with the current administration and a desire for change in the government. This is evidenced by the call for a strong candidate who can defeat Biden and the concerns about election integrity.

Trump’s dominant win in Iowa has set a high bar, while DeSantis and Haley are offering distinct alternatives to Trump's style and politics. In a curious twist, some Democrats are reportedly willing to caucus for Haley if it boosts her chances against Trump, even though they plan to vote for Biden in the general election. This underlines the complexity of the political landscape and the high stakes of this election. It also demonstrates the level of opposition to a potential Trump nomination within sections of both the Democratic and Republican electorate.

Candidate Approval - Trump Alone Above 50%

The criticism of both Haley and DeSantis for representing "same old" politics suggests that there may be a desire for a more non-traditional candidate. New Hampshire’s primary is shaping up to be a closely contested race. Trump's strong, albeit divisive, support base, DeSantis's as-yet unclear position, and Haley's potential appeal to cross-party voters could all impact the eventual outcome.

• Nikki Haley, despite underperforming in the Iowa caucus, seems to have a unique appeal, especially among Democrats who seem to prefer her over President Biden. Her campaign has focused on her electability, with canvassers in New Hampshire emphasizing her potential to defeat Biden in a general election. However, there are also voters who have expressed strong opposition to her, using the hashtag #NeverNikki, suggesting a divided public sentiment towards her candidacy.

Recent MIG data shows that online discussion about an impeachment inquiry against President Biden has not yet garnered wide attention, although there is some increase.

• Discussion jumped from 506 to 1,278 people talking about “impeachment” between December 10 and 11.
• Sentiment toward the subject dropped from 47% to 46% on the same days.
• What discussion does exist seems to be split according to political leanings.

Comments in Favor of Impeachment

• Some argue there is evidence that President Biden had illicit interactions with unspecified individuals and should therefore be impeached.
• Some believe that the President acted illegally or unethically regarding his family's business interests, citing an Associated Press poll that 70% of Americans, including 40% of Democrats, support this view.
• Users point to the alleged spending of Hunter Biden as a potential point of investigation and grounds for impeachment.
• Some mention that the House is expected to vote on an impeachment inquiry due to alleged evidence that Biden had multiple interactions with his son's foreign business associates.
• Some argue that Biden lied about his son's activities, which they view as grounds for impeachment.

Comments Against Impeachment

• Some argue that Republicans are seeking to impeach Biden without any concrete evidence of wrongdoing.
• Arguments that the impeachment inquiry is a political move by Republicans aimed at undermining Biden's presidency.
• Some vocally support Biden and Harris and plan to vote for Democrats in future elections, suggesting they do not support the impeachment inquiry.
• Users cited Mitt Romney's statement that he has not seen any evidence to authorize the impeachment inquiry.
• Some people argue that the situation in the country would be much worse if Biden was not the president, indicating they do not support the impeachment.

SCOOP

The recent Congressional hearings on antisemitism in Ivy League schools, specifically focusing on Representative Elise Stefanik's questioning, have sparked intense online discussions. The sentiment surrounding Stefanik's stance on Israel and her inquiries into antisemitism varies widely. Despite the polarization, a notable theme emerges from the conversations: a growing belief among many Americans that Ivy League institutions are not doing enough to curb hateful rhetoric on their campuses.

Key Themes Of Discussion

Support for Stefanik's Questioning:

Many online commentators expressed appreciation for Stefanik's pointed questions during the Congressional hearings. Some thanked her for bringing attention to the issue of antisemitism and criticized Harvard for what they perceived as a failure to condemn hateful rhetoric. Stefanik's inquiries about calls for the destruction of Israel were seen as necessary to address concerns about the university's code of conduct.

<figure class="image image_resized" style="width:75%;"

Criticism of Stefanik

On the flip side, there were criticisms of Stefanik, with some questioning her approach. Detractors accused her of conflating legitimate criticism of Israeli policies with antisemitism and argued that her definition of antisemitic behavior was overly broad. Some even suggested that Stefanik was using the situation for political gain, aligning herself with former President Trump.

Debate Over Free Speech:

The discussions also delved into the broader debate over free speech on college campuses. Some users argued that universities should focus on educating individuals making antisemitic statements rather than outright punishment. Others contended that certain forms of speech, particularly those inciting hatred or violence, should not be protected under the banner of free speech.

<figure class="image image_resized" style="width:75%;"

Concerns About Academic Institutions:

A recurrent theme in the discussions was the criticism directed at Ivy League institutions and academia. Some users accused these institutions of fostering antisemitism and failing to protect Jewish students adequately. This criticism extended to the perceived evasiveness of academic responses, contrasting them unfavorably with the perspectives of "ordinary" working people.

There are varied opinions towards defunding Ivy League institutions altogether. The majority of the posts do not explicitly advocate for defunding, but they do express disappointment and concern about how these institutions are handling issues of antisemitism and so-called "woke" ideologies. There are calls for the resignation of university presidents and criticism of their responses to the Congressional hearings.

Conclusion

While online discussions on antisemitism in Ivy League schools are diverse and often polarized, a common thread emerged – a growing perception among many Americans that Ivy League institutions are falling short in addressing and preventing hateful rhetoric. We saw a rise in both positive and negative comments for Stefanik on topics like “Israel” and “Ideologies,” while support for “universities” experienced a dip the day of the hearing and the day after.

The hearings, particularly Stefanik's questioning, have brought to light the complexities of the issue, reflecting broader debates on free speech, political motivations, and the role of academic institutions in shaping societal values. The calls for increased accountability and efforts to confront antisemitism on campuses suggest a need for continued dialogue and action in the pursuit of tolerance and understanding.

Scoop

Governor Gavin Newsom’s public opinion has dropped after outrage over San Francisco’s overnight clean up for foreign dignitaries arriving for last week’s APEC Summit.

The Details

• Ahead of the summit, San Francisco authorities dismantled homeless encampments downtown, scrubbed away graffiti, and installed murals and decorative crosswalks to spruce up high-traffic zones.
• Newsom acknowledged the summit motivated the city to "raise the bar" on cleaning efforts.

What they’re saying

The Governor quipped to reporters 'I know folks are saying, 'Oh, they're just cleaning up this place because all those fancy leaders are coming to town,' said Newsom late last week.

'That's true, because it's true - but it's also true for months and months and months prior to APEC, we've been having conversations.'

"He was more concerned with promoting...his policies instead of addressing the human suffering on our streets," said Jennifer Friedenbach of the Coalition on Homelessness.

Conservative Pundit Megyn Kelly derided the Governor’s priorities, “Gavin Newsom and Mayor Breed clean up the city just in time for the Chinese leader to show up there with Joe Biden...They’re important, but the actual residents of San Francisco can pound sand,' Kelly said on her podcast.

Movement

• As media focused on the pre-summit clean up and Newsom’s comments acknowledging the clean up, Newsom has earned consistently lower daily opinion scores.
  • In the first half of the last 30 days, Newsom’s daily opinion scores only fell below 45% once.
  • Since November 9th, Newsom's daily public opinion scores have only topped 45% once, mostly lingering between 43-44% on most days.
  • Despite touting negotiation wins with China on fentanyl and carbon emissions, opinion amongst users discussing Newsom online tumbled further on the first day of the Summit, dropping from 44% on November 15th to 39% on November 16th.
    • This was the lowest daily opinion score for Newsom in the last 30 days.

Lasting Impression

The California Governor continues to be attacked for the clean up fiasco, finding himself in first place amongst major politicians who earn more negative than positive comments online.

Looking ahead

As speculation grows over a future Newsom presidential bid, the spotlight on California’s homelessness crisis seems unlikely to dim, posing a significant political challenge to the California Governor’s political ambition.

A recent MIG report has found that many Americans have a general feeling of skepticism and lack of trust towards the government. This attitude is held among both Democrats and Republicans.

• Many feel there is a deep state or establishment elite who operate by different rules than average citizens.
• There’s a belief that the government, media, and certain elites are working together to control narratives and manipulate public opinion.
• People accuse these entities of using their power to silence opposition and protect their own interests.

Daily Sentiment for the Top Discussion Topics

Trump and Discussion About a Weaponized Government

Trump remains a highly polarizing figure for both sides, often gaining mention in discussions about abuses of state power. This is true of both parties, whether they perceive Trump as misusing the state himself or having it used against him.

• There is a perception that politicians on both sides of the aisle are not genuinely looking out for the interests of the public, but rather their own political agendas.
• Vocal criticisms of Republicans who didn’t support Trump and Democrats who are seen as being overly focused on criticizing Trump.
• There's a belief that the "deep state" or establishment is actively working to keep Trump out of power and that there's a double standard in how allegations against him and his team have been handled compared to others, including the Biden family.
• There are calls for a thorough cleaning of the government to rid it of "deep state actors," with some suggesting that Trump should be the one to do this.

Skepticism Toward Government Agencies

Some people believe that government agencies, in particular the FBI and IRS, are being used as weapons against ordinary citizens.

• Americans have concerns about tax enforcement and the handling of events such as the January 6th Capitol riots.
• Some express frustration with the perceived lack of action from the GOP, accusing them of not doing enough to protect the 2020 election, build the wall, or defund organizations like the FBI and IRS.
• There's a strong sentiment among the public about the lack of transparency and accountability in the government and judicial system.

Special Treatment for Elite Figures

People feel that those in power or with influence can get away with actions that would have severe consequences for average citizens.

• There is a concern that high-profile figures, like Paul Manifort and Arnold Schwarzenegger, are treated differently by the justice system and media due to their status or political alignment.
• Some discuss the 2024 election as a critical point for addressing these government-bias issues, with Trump seen as a potential solution to "clean up the Swamp."
• Some suggest that the government is corrupt and that certain figures, like the Vindman brothers, are complicit in this corruption and are trying to outmaneuver the will of the people.

The Public’s View of the Media

There's mistrust towards the media, with some accusing it of being a mouthpiece for the "deep state" and focusing on trivial matters to distract from larger issues.

• The COVID-19 pandemic is perceived to have exposed corruption in the government and media, as well as the extent of propaganda used to manipulate public emotions.
• Accusations of hypocrisy among government and media figures.

What Americans are Saying

Overall, Americans feel they do not know what’s happening in the government dues to lack of transparency and lack of education.

• Several comments suggested that people want to understand the workings of the government and justice system better.
• Many people expressed a desire for change in the system. There are calls to ensure everyone, regardless of their status or influence, is treated equally by the justice system.
• There’s a perception that each side feel more skepticism, depending on which party is in power. However, the data does not clearly indicate which party is more skeptical overall.
• Many people feel disillusioned and cynical about government institutions.
• There's a desire for more public involvement in government decision-making, including public meetings and debates, as well as mechanisms for public feedback and input.

A growing rift has emerged among Democrats over the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, according to a new Media Intelligence Report.

• Overall online sentiment toward Israel and Hamas has been split over the past week at 38% and 36% respectively.
• However, among Democrats, sentiment has been more evenly divided between Israel and Hamas
• at 45% each.
• These sentiment indicators highlight growing ideological differences between factions in the Democrat party.

The Dividing Line for Dems

• The MIG report identified a generational divide, with younger Democrats generally more critical of Israel than older members who emphasize Israel's security needs.
• Moderate Democrats urged a balanced approach, condemning Hamas while addressing Gaza's humanitarian plight.
• Some old-school Democrats decry what they see as a shocking increase in antisemitism among college students and far-left Democrats.
• These divisions are causing a rare crack in the normally unified Democrat front.

What Democrats Are Saying

Historically, Democrats tend to move in lockstep, coalescing around a common principle or ideology that drives progressive policy. That is not the case when it comes to Israel.

Support for Israel Among Democrats

• Some Democrats defend Israel's military actions as necessary self-defense against Hamas. They argue that Israel is responding to aggression and criticize Hamas for using civilians as human shields.
• Among these Democrats, there is support for Biden’s $14.5 billion in military aid for Israel, without humanitarian assistance for Gaza.
• Many view Hamas’ actions on October 7 as a “vile atrocity” that requires immediate response.
• Overall, many older and more moderate Democrats seem to be inclined to support Israel compared to younger, extremely progressive Democrats.
• Many in the Jewish community argue that pro-Palestine protestors misunderstand the threat from Hamas and overly simplify the complex history.

Pro-Palestine Democrats

• In contrast, many younger Democrats accuse Israel of war crimes and "genocide" in Gaza. The far left celebrated the terror attack, refused to condemn it, or suggested Israel bears responsibility.
• They call for an end to U.S. military aid to Israel and an immediate ceasefire.
• Recent pro-Palestine protests in Washington DC, suggest a growing sentiment in support of Palestine.
• These individuals argue that Palestinians are being disproportionately targeted and suffer more casualties compared to Israeli civilians.
• Protestors demand the Biden administration take a firmer pro-Palestine stance.
• Some demand steps be taken to hold Israeli leadership accountable for alleged atrocities. Many protesters also express support for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

Other Takeaways

• Overall, there seems to be a division over what constitutes antisemitism. Some say criticism of Israel equates antisemitism.
• Others argue that animosity towards Israel is growing, worsening antisemitism.
• Meanwhile, others argue criticism is not inherently antisemitic.
• In sum, the discourse reveals deep divisions not only between different political and ideological groups, but also within them.