MIG Reports data shows increasing conversations about potential U.S. dollar decline, the Laffer Curve, and policy hypocrisy from Kamala Harris. Americans continue to discuss the Biden administration’s fiscal policies and the failure of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

Some say the IRA impacted the U.S. economy positively, but many criticize its results as contradicting its promises. Negative discourse also extends to the Federal Reserve's monetary policy, where inflation, interest rates, and economic management strategies further polarize opinions. Overall, there is growing apprehension about America's economic future.

Many economists utilize the Laffer Curve as a general theory, though it is not an exact instrument. The Laffer Curve illustrates the relationship between tax rates and tax revenue, showing there is an optimal tax rate which maximizes revenue. If tax rates are too low, the government collects less revenue. If tax rates are too high, it can discourage economic activity, also decreasing revenue. The curve suggests both very low and very high tax rates can negatively impact revenue.

Concerns over the implications of analysis using the Laffer Curve highlight these facts:

• 2019 tax revenue per person was $12,628 while tax spending was $16,188
• 2023 tax revenue per person was $13,341 while tax spending was $18,406
• Tax revenue per person increased by approximately 5.65%
• Tax spending per person increased by approximately 13.70%

This increased government spending continues to widen disparities between tax revenue and tax spending. In recent comments, economist Art Laffer also suggested the U.S. dollar may jeopardize its status as the world’s reserve currency saying, “the U.S. government’s use of the dollar as a political weapon, through sanctions and other measures, has eroded international trust in the currency.”

Economist Art Laffer Slams US Economic Policies, Warns of Dollar's Decline as Global Reserve Currency - #Economics https://t.co/rRPRxNCTNT

— Bitcoin.com News (@BTCTN) August 10, 2024

Harris’s Hypocritical Fiscal Policy

Voter sentiment about the Inflation Reduction Act is negative. Many blame current economic struggles on this policy—including high inflation, increased IRS oversight, and elevated costs for goods and services.

VP Kamala Harris, who cast the deciding vote to pass the IRA, regularly attracts criticism in online conversations. People describe the IRA as a political maneuver that, contrary to its name, exacerbated inflation rather than mitigating it. Many people also view it as especially harmful to low-income workers.

Harris also generates extreme negativity for recent claims in a campaign speech that she plans to remove taxes on tips. People accuse her of plagiarism, pointing out that Donald Trump began promoting this concept back in June.

People point out that Harris’s deciding vote on the IRA directly contradicts her new promise. They highlight the policy’s IRS expansions to pursue taxpayers for not paying taxes. They cite that the IRS, under the Biden-Harris administration, rolled out a “tip reporting” program in February to improve tip reporting compliance.

Kamala Harris, who now claims to be against taxing tips, was the tie-breaking vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, which expanded the IRS so it could go after people not paying taxes on tips.

Incredible stuff. The most inauthentic, astro-turfed campaign in history. pic.twitter.com/9Nne61oJPi

— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) August 11, 2024

Sentiment trends are unmistakably negative when discussing Biden-Harris administration fiscal policies. People associate Harris with increased financial hardship and increasingly accuse her of disingenuous flip-flopping.

The reliability of sentiment analysis is high given the volume and consistency of negative feedback. Common themes include accusations that the IRA was a disguised effort to push progressive agendas rather than control inflation.

Voters complain that targeting tips for tax revenue, as Harris has very recently done, impacts lower income households who rely on tip wages. People allege misallocation of funds under Harris toward initiatives like climate change and say overall tax burdens on middle-class families are increasing.

Partisan proponents of the IRA and the Biden-Harris administration cite lowered prescription drug costs and clean energy advancements as key benefits. Opponents argue these benefits are overshadowed by overarching economic downturn, characterizing the IRA as a net negative.

Trump Versus Harris Tax Policies

The concept of the Laffer Curve influences discussions on tax cuts and their impact on revenue and economic growth. Some also debate fiat currency and the Federal Reserve's role in managing the U.S. dollar. Public sentiment is divided on these topics, as some distrust the Fed's control over fiat money, advocating alternatives like Bitcoin. Many Americans view the Federal Reserve as increasing inflation and debt through money printing, though some also believe it is a stabilizer in financial crises.

Sentiments towards Kamala Harris regarding the economy is largely negative. Voters are skeptical about her promises to eliminate taxes on tips. They see the claims as politically motivated, pandering, and an attempt appropriate Trump's populist policy proposals.

Democratic VP nominee Tim Walz also faces criticism for how he handled Minnesota’s budget surplus. Voters say his tax hikes during surplus periods caused inefficient economic management.

The narrative around Trump's tax policies is nostalgic as voters recall his tax cuts. There is pronounced positivity toward middle-class and small business tax savings. Voters highlight Trump's previous economic measures, like the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, as significant achievements that benefited the American workforce.

Trump's proposal earlier this year to eliminate federal tax on tips has been positively received by voters. Many suggest this is why Kamala Harris suddenly adopted the idea as well, despite looking hypocritical in doing so. People also lambast the media for how they report on Harris proposing no tax on tips versus how they reported Trump's initial proposal. One stark example gaining criticism is CBS news, which framed it as a tragic loss of tax revenue under Trump then, subsequently, a win for service and hospitality workers under Harris.

What an honest media we have.

SAME policy. Different candidates. pic.twitter.com/PJHcEB5M9y

— Wesley Hunt (@WesleyHuntTX) August 12, 2024

Trending directions indicate an increasing anxiety about the potential for recession. Americans worry about recent stock market crashes, heightened geopolitical uncertainties, and economic policies that perpetuate instability. Voters pay attention to economic indicators like unemployment rates and GDP growth. Any shifts are met with calls for urgent rate cuts to stimulate economic activity.

Online conversations about Gen Z and Millennial Americans’ retirement prospects reveal anxieties about stability and future financial security. The younger generations harbor severe skepticism about their financial situations and the trajectory of the economy. They are critical of government and leadership actions, especially the Biden-Harris administration.

Retirement? I Can’t Afford Food

When thinking about the future, people talk about inflation, taxation, employment, and energy policies. One prominent concern is increasing inflation, which many attribute to legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Many view the IRA as exacerbating rather than alleviating inflationary pressures.

Others repeat government talking points that Democratic policies have been instrumental in curbing inflation. They reference statistics like the lowering of inflation to 2.5% over the past year.

Younger voters constantly worry about the rising cost of living. There is widespread sentiment that everyday expenses like gas, groceries, and housing, have outrageously unaffordable. Many attribute this surge in costs to the economic decisions made by the federal government.

Americans particularly criticize federal spending on various relief and infrastructure bills. These discussions prominently mention the adverse effects on average American households. They say financial strain is significantly hindering their ability to contribute to retirement savings and long-term financial planning.

Taxes are also a huge topic among younger voters, although many are split in their views on tax policies. Some express concern about increasing tax burdens, particularly related to Democratic plans to eliminate Trump-era tax cuts. People mention potential hikes and wealth redistribution through social programs, which they say disproportionately affect the middle and lower economic classes.

Trending keywords include:

• Inflation
• Taxes
• Cost of living
• Bidenomics
• Inflation Reduction Act
• Job market
• Social Security
• Economic policies

Sentiment Patterns

Voter sentiment is mostly negative about the current economic climate. This is especially pronounced with criticisms of the Biden-Harris administration's handling of economic policies, inflation, and national debt.

Demographically, the critiques appear to span various regions and economic classes, with large numbers of middle-class and working-class Americans expressing dissatisfaction. Millennials and Gen Z voices are prominent, expressing concerns about the future. They mention things like student loan burdens, job market uncertainties, and the feasibility of homeownership and retirement savings plans.

Geographically, sentiments fluctuate across both liberal and conservative states. However, there does seem to be a national preoccupation with economic issues. While sentiments occasionally vary, the core concerns of rising costs and economic instability appear to be universal.

MIG Reports data shows recent online discussions about economic hardships with inflation as a critical point of anxiety. Several key topics are frequently discussed among Americans as they react to their current economic struggles.

Many Americans are feeling significant cost increases day to day—particularly for essential items like food, gas, and housing. A lot of people point out this inflation disproportionately affects the middle and lower classes. Sentiment is frustration with anxiety about financial stability and the future.

Top Concerns for Americans

One of the big worries voters discuss is taxation. There is growing frustration about the fairness of the current tax system. Some critics—often on the left—say it favors the wealthy and large corporations at the expense of the middle class.

Higher taxes, particularly under Democratic policies, make people feel burdened as they are already struggling. Both working-class Democrat voters and right leaning voters have complaints about taxes on the middle class.

Employment and job security are also significant themes. People worry about corporations outsourcing American jobs, as in the case of Zoom cashiers in New York City. They also talk about the impact of union policies on job availability for blue collar workers.

Job concerns are intertwined with fears about the sustainability and dignity of the American middle-class workforce. Many middle- and working-class Americans worry about losing their jobs or not being able to find a job.

High inflation remains a top concern as well. Voters believe inflation rates are unacceptable and unsustainable. The rising cost of living, particularly groceries and housing, puts a significant strain on household budgets.

High interest rates also create a barrier for most Americans to purchase homes. This further adds to economic anxiety. Many voters also express displeasure with high gas prices, which have a cascading effect on their overall cost of living.

Dissatisfaction with Bidenomics

American families feel frustration, distrust in leadership, and a desire for change. Trump supporters are particularly vocal about reversing current policies they believe are detrimental to the economy. They dislike Biden policies they see as affecting fuel prices and border security.

Many argue Biden administration policies are increasing economic strain by exacerbating inflation and increasing layoffs. There is a distinct shift among some undecided voters and potential Biden defectors. They express sharp dissatisfaction with how Biden has handled the economy.

Talk about tangible economic outcomes which a second Trump administration might bring is increasing Trump’s support. Exasperated voters reminisce about the successes of his previous administration. They cite lower taxes, reduced regulation, and economic growth and appear to be attracting undecided voters and others dissatisfied with Biden.

Another positive discussion point is Trump’s proposal to exempt tips from tax. Many Americans hope for a return to policies that benefit the middle class. They want leaders who will address specific pain points like inflation and job security.

Conversely, Biden’s support drops with any spotlighting on his economic failures. Reminders of persistent inflation, high taxes, and a poor job market disheartens voters about his capability to manage the country's economy.

Stressing the immediate and visible impacts of pressing economic issues on everyday life resonates with those feeling the pinch in their own finances.

Recent reports that a significant majority of Ukrainians prefer President Joe Biden over former President Donald Trump has sparked diverse reactions among Americans. There is currently a contentious and polarized view of Ukraine in the United States, exacerbating disagreements.

American sentiment toward the Biden administration's foreign policies, particularly regarding financial aid to Ukraine, are generally negative.

What Americans Are Saying

There is growing frustration and opposition among Americans to the U.S. continuing financial support for Ukraine. Many express concerns over taxpayer money being diverted to foreign conflicts while domestic issues within the United States, such as inflation, border security, and crime rates, remain inadequately addressed.

Those who oppose Ukraine aid argue continuing to fund the Russia-Ukraine war contributes to rising inflation and the national debt at home. In turn, this causes greater economic hardships for American citizens.

Critics of Ukraine aid view weakness in Biden's foreign policy and leadership, comparing him to Trump's tougher stance against international adversaries. They say the Obama and Biden administrations both failed to prevent Russia's initial incursions. They view Biden's current policies as ineffective or even encouraging Russian aggression.

There are voices—though they seem less prominent—defending the Biden administration's approach to Ukraine. Supporters emphasize the importance of assisting an ally in its struggle against authoritarian aggression. The view Ukraine aid as a necessary stand for democratic values and global security. They also argue bolstering Ukraine's defense capabilities deters further territorial ambitions by Russia and serves long-term American and allied interests.

Resentment Toward Continued Aid

Partisan viewpoints directly impact discussions on whether to continue or cease funding Ukraine's war effort. The decreasing support for financial aid to Ukraine is particularly strong among conservative and right-leaning constituencies. They advocate for reallocating funds to address pressing domestic issues.

This decreasing support for Ukraine aid also makes critics less likely to acknowledge Ukrainian views of the U.S. presidency. Many Republicans argue that Ukrainians are obviously incentivized to support Biden whose deluge of funding is contingent on his reelection.

Further, Ukraine critics are increasingly suspicious of corruption among those involved in sending a receiving aid. Allegations of money laundering and ulterior motives abound, with some pointing to the Biden family's alleged ties to Ukrainian businesses as evidence of potential conflicts of interest. This amplifies distrust and fosters calls for greater transparency and accountability in U.S. foreign aid payments.

Concerns about fraud, waste, and abuse have been a consistent topic since the beginning of the Ukraine-Russia war. Olena Zelenska, Ukraine’s First Lady, was accused in viral online reporting of purchasing a Bugatti supercar for 4.5 million euros—which is equal to $4,878,000. Immediate fact-checking articles from mainstream media outlets countered these allegations, likely deepening the positions of Americans who oppose Ukraine funding.

The landscape of American public opinion on this matter is complex and shaded with skepticism about foreign interventions. Ukrainians preferring Biden over Trump serves as a catalyst for a broader debate that encompasses economic concerns, national priorities, and profound mistrust toward Joe Biden.

Donald Trump's comments last week promising to eliminate taxes on tips got voters talking, showing mixed support across the political spectrum. Overall, the idea of exempting tips from income tax is generally well-received. This is especially true for those directly affected—restaurant and hospitality workers—who stand to keep more of their hard-earned money.

Trump’s promise to reduce working-class tax burdens is getting enthusiastic support within this voter group. They feel this tax relief would directly benefit their day-to-day lives. However, detractors argue the plan could reduce federal revenues and contribute to budget deficits unless offset by other measures.

Online discussions about economic and tax policies reflect broader concerns about the economy, with many people comparing conditions under Trump and Biden. Some argue the economy was better under Trump's administration, citing lower inflation rates, lower energy and food prices, and a more robust job market. They believe Trump's tax cuts had a positive impact on economic growth and hope similar policies will revive the economy again.

• Trump’s approval on taxes remained relatively steady before and after his comments on eliminating tip taxes.
• However, his approval regarding “low income” jumped from 47% to 49% after his comments.

Demographic Reactions

Tip Workers

Service industry workers, who are the primary beneficiaries of this proposal, respond positively across the political spectrum. For many servers, bartenders, and other tipped employees, eliminating taxes on tips translates into a direct increase in take-home pay. This demographic appreciates the tangible impact on their daily lives, which could mean a more stable financial situation and less stress regarding tax filings.

Income Groups

Among the lower economic classes, Trump's proposal is largely welcomed. Despite political affiliations, individuals in these classes tend to focus on the increased disposable income, which would help cover living expenses and potentially mitigate financial instability.

Middle-class voters also express cautious optimism. Some see it as a necessary relief amid current economic challenges, such as inflation and high living costs. However, others worry about the broader economic ramifications which might lead to higher prices for essential goods.

Wealthier individuals, who may not be directly affected by the change, may still support it to boost consumer spending and morale within the service industry. Although some criticize it as a short-term political maneuver with uncertain long-term fiscal implications.

Age Groups

Demographic factors such as age and race also influence opinions. Younger voters, especially those working through college or in entry-level service positions, invite immediate personal benefits. Nevertheless, many still generally align with a broader generational stance that favors progressive taxation and public welfare.

Minorities

Minority communities, who are overrepresented in lower-wage service jobs, appreciate the direct financial relief. But they also remain cautious about the long-term impacts and hope for comprehensive wage reforms which align with Democratic tax platforms.

Trump Supporters Support No Tip Taxes

Republicans and Trump Supporters largely view his proposal to eliminate taxes on tips as a positive step. They believe it would benefit the working class, especially those in the hospitality and service industries who rely heavily on tips. These supporters say it would provide immediate financial relief, thus increasing disposable income for millions of Americans.

Usually Republicans, this group highlights the overall economic environment during Trump's previous term with lower inflation, energy independence, and lower taxes. They view past results as indicative of the future potential success of similar policies.

There is also a related conversation around Trump’s proposal to replace all income tax with increased tariffs. This plan to compensate lost tax revenues get support from those who believe it would strengthen domestic industries and ultimately benefit American workers.

Democrats Don’t Want to Lose Tax Revenue

Most Democrats commenting on Trump’s proposal express significant concern over the long-term economic impacts of eliminating taxes on tips. They also fear replacing all income tax with tariffs could spark inflation, decrease consumption, and potentially lead to a recession.

Critics feel lower taxes would exacerbate income inequality and create adverse effects on social security and Medicare funding, which are typically supported by tax revenues.

Some progressive Democrats and service industry workers, who are typically loyal to the Democratic Party, acknowledge that eliminating taxes on tips could offer genuine financial benefits to low-income workers. But these voters often couch their approval in broader critiques of Trump’s overall economic policies. They hedge by saying such isolated tax cuts fail to address systemic financial inequalities.

More mainstream and centrist Democrats were generally skeptical, viewing the proposal as a populist measure designed to garner quick support. They don’t believe Trump has real plans for a thorough solution to larger economic issues facing workers.

Anti-Trump voters say, while beneficial on its face, this tax change might not compensate for his other policies they view as detrimental to low-income and middle-class Americans. They cite programs like social services and healthcare, which they believe Trump wants to defund.

MIG Reports analysis of conversations around illegal immigration and its financial implications reveals a hotly debated issue, especially when compared with domestic financial costs for programs like Medicaid and food stamps. Voter discussion trends and overall sentiment reveals a significant portion of the discourse focusing on policy solutions such as border security and deportation.

What Americans Are Saying

Financial Burden: Voters often complain that illegal immigrants pose a greater financial burden on the U.S. economy than programs like Medicaid or food stamps. This is often highlighted by citing the costs associated with healthcare, housing, education, and other social services.

Border Security: Many people advocate for stronger border security measures to mitigate illegal immigration. This includes building a wall, using advanced surveillance technology, and increasing the presence of border patrol and military personnel.

Political Accountability: There is noticeable frustration directed at political figures and parties who voters believe have failed to address or have exacerbated the issues of border security and illegal immigration.

Economic and Safety Concerns: Some discussions link illegal immigration to broader concerns about job competition, public safety, and the strain on public resources, which are perceived to impact the economic and social fabric of local communities.

Sentiment Analysis

Negative Sentiment: There is a high volume of negative discussion, particularly in terms of frustration and anger towards current immigration policies and the perceived lack of action from political leaders. Terms like "invasion" and accusations of policy failures amplify this negative sentiment.

Positive Sentiment: These are generally focused on proposals for stricter immigration controls and support for measures that promise to enhance border security. Advocates for stronger borders express a sense of urgency and necessity in their messages.

The strong sentiments surrounding immigration issues and the financial burden narrative could potentially increase support for policies aiming at closing the border and implementing mass deportations. The portrayal of illegal immigrants as a significant economic strain could drive public opinion towards favoring more extreme measures to secure the border and reduce illegal entries.

Recent viral reporting on Biden's proposed tax hikes has generated heated criticism and outrage online. Some say the proposed capital gains tax increase to 44.6% and an unrealized gains tax of 25% will predominantly affect the wealthy. Supporters insist the wealthy deserve to pay their “fair share.” Critics argue high earners already pay a significant portion of total taxes. Many also say the government should focus more on reducing its spending rather than increasing taxation.

Opposition to Unrealized Gains Tax

Discussions have ensued particularly about the proposed unrealized gains tax. This tax would be levied on any increase in value of an asset, even if it has not yet been sold. For example, if a person buys a stock for $100 and it increases in value to $150, they will have an unrealized gain of $50. Currently, Americans are not taxed on this gain until they sell the stock. Taxing unrealized gains is highly controversial, with opponents arguing it would be unfair and would cause financial hardships for people who have seen their assets increase in value but do not have the cash on hand to pay a tax on the gain.

The severe negative sentiment towards an unrealized gains tax is expressed in tweets like one from venture capitalist David Sacks. Many voters who align with this thinking say Biden’s proposed tax increase will destroy American taxpayers and business owners.

Let’s say you build a business from scratch and qualify for Biden’s new 25% unrealized gains tax. So you have to sell 25% of your business to pay the tax. But now you have to pay 44.6% cap gains + 13.3% CA on that. So you actually have to sell ~37%. Is this right?

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) April 25, 2024

Another argument against taxing unrealized gains suggests it’s unfair because it requires taxpayers to pay taxes on income they haven’t received. Voters talk about the idea of a tax on unrealized gains as outright theft.

Most Americans seem to believe that Biden’s tax hikes would lead to negative economic consequences. They say it would force reduced investment and economic growth, discouraging entrepreneurship, which would harm the economy.

• Following 2024 Tax Day, sentiment toward taxes started to decline, falling from 48% on April 14 to 46% on the 15th and 44% 10 days later.
• Americans are also increasingly negative on the economy, with sentiment sinking to 42% following news about Biden’s proposed tax plans.

Many voters also discuss their belief that taxes are being misused by the government. They complain that money gets spent on things they disagree with or is not being distributed fairly. Two recent issues Americans complain are a misuse of tax dollars are illegal immigrant support and foreign aid.

Voter Group Reactions

Wealthy Americans who would be directly impacted by the new tax policies are most likely voice negativity about Biden’s plan. They argue it would deter investment and prevent doing business. They say it’s effectively double taxation since capital gains are often derived from income that has already been taxed.

Some small business owners who have assets but are not extremely wealthy also disapprove of the proposal. They express concerns that, even if they don’t reach the affected tax backet, it could indirectly impact their businesses if wealthy consumers and investors cut back on spending and investment.

Republican voters of all economic classes are also generally opposed to the tax hike. They say higher taxes will hurt economic growth, regardless of who is personally affected. They also argue it would penalize success and discourage entrepreneurship.

Democratic voters are generally supportive of the tax increase. However, some moderate Democrats have expressed concern about the potential impact on business and economic growth.

Many people online also point out that Biden’s proposal, if implemented, would impose the highest capital gains tax rate in history. They also highlight the fact that Jimmy Carter, who also proposed increased capital gains taxes, suffered politically.

Biden is proposing a 44.6% capital gains tax, the highest ever, previously set by Jimmy Carter.

Here's how that worked out for Jimmy Carter: pic.twitter.com/UFiiPl6Skb

— Joe Consorti ⚡ (@JoeConsorti) April 24, 2024

Democrats and Lower Economic Classes are in Favor

Biden defenders are generally more supportive of the tax hike, viewing it as a way to address income inequality. They argue the wealthy should pay more taxes and be prevented from monopolizing wealth. They say the additional revenue could be used to fund programs that benefit lower income individuals, such as education and healthcare.

Progressive voters and lower income Americans often push back against online complaints about higher taxes, claiming many who are complaining are not wealthy enough to be affected. They argue the rich benefit disproportionately from economic growth and should therefore contribute more in taxes.

MIG Reports analysis of Joe Biden's proposed plan to grant legal status to illegal immigrants who married U.S. citizens sheds light on the heated and polarizing debate around immigration policy in the United States. The discussion shows a clear divide in opinions about the Biden policy with little room for a neutral stance.

This Biden program would provide “mixed-status couples” exemption from deporting the spouse who is in the country illegally. Critics express deep-seated frustrations over the financial burden on taxpayers, perceived threats to national security, and prioritizing foreign interests over domestic issues. They call for stricter border control measures, notably the construction of a wall along the southern U.S. border, and express anger at what they perceive as a lack of action from political leaders to address these concerns. There are also allegations of corruption and misuse of funds intended for the construction of the border wall, further fueling the controversy. The issue becomes especially touchy for Americans who feel the real-world impact of Biden's economic policies.

Supporters of the proposed policy are reacting saying criticism is misdirected and more comprehensive immigration reform is necessary. They point out the shortcomings of a wall as a deterrent for illegal immigration, suggesting alternative border control measures. 

Implications on the Border Discussion

If Biden continues with the policy of granting work authorization to illegal alien spouses, it could potentially escalate the ongoing debate about immigration policies. This may lead to further polarization of public opinion, with one group arguing for the rights of these individuals and another group emphasizing the need to prioritize the interests of American citizens.

Sentiment towards border control measures is likely to remain contentious. Those advocating for stricter measures will likely stand firm in their beliefs, especially if the high number of illegal crossings does not cease. Those against a physical wall may push for more progressive immigration reform, claiming to focus on the root causes of migration and advocating for more humane treatment of immigrants.

Biden's policies on these issues will continue to be a focal point of political and public discussion, with sentiment likely to fluctuate in response to policy changes and ongoing events at the border.

Given recent reactions to the $61 billion aid package for Ukraine, it's clear opinions on this issue are contentious among Americans. As we look towards the 2024 election, these divisions could become even more pronounced. Many voters express concern about the amount of money being spent abroad while issues at home, such as rising food costs and threats towards minority communities, are not being adequately addressed.

Critics of the bill argue the aid package is a misuse of funds, asserting the money could be better spent addressing domestic issues. Some feel it’s an example of the U.S. involving itself in conflicts that do not directly affect the country, suggesting an “America Last” sentiment. They also express skepticism about the effectiveness of the aid and question the motivations behind the bill. Some on the right accuse Speaker Mike Johnson of pushing through the bill for political gain.

Supporters of the bill see it as a necessary measure to support allies and uphold democratic values in the face of aggression. They argue providing aid to Ukraine is in the U.S.'s strategic interest. They also claim opposing the bill equates to supporting Russian aggression and undermining democracy. However, there is stronger support for the parts of the bill that provide aid to Israel and Taiwan.

Many Americans express dissatisfaction with the bill as a whole. Their primary concern is the domestic impact, questioning why such a large sum of money is being sent overseas while American citizens are struggling with high living costs, poverty, and other social issues. They criticize the government for neglecting domestic needs in favor of foreign aid.

Another group, including some hardline Republicans, voice their opposition to the aid package for ideological reasons. They view it as fueling conflicts and promoting a globalist agenda, with some suggesting it's part of a Zionist project for world domination. They also express concerns about the potential for money to escalate conflicts in the Middle East and Asia.

There seems to be a growing sentiment of frustration among voters at the perceived neglect of domestic issues. This could potentially drive a surge in support for Trump and others who more often champions an "America First" stance.

Overall, it seems a significant portion of the population dislikes the massive foreign aid package. They believe funds should be used at home to address things like poverty, healthcare, and infrastructure. If this group becomes frustrated enough, they’ll likely support candidates in the 2024 elections who prioritize domestic issues over international ones.