Agenda Signals / Search

Search Agenda Signals

Search for subjects across all topics.

Portrays the Labour Party as internally fractured and losing confidence in leadership

0 +
-7

Portrays the Democratic Party as hypocritical and willing to abandon moral principles for political power

0 +
-9

Frames GOP and Trump-backed candidates as victims of systemic media bias

0 +
+8

Implies collusion between media platforms and Democratic interests

0 +
-7

Portrays Democratic actors as upholding legal integrity

0 +
+5

Portrays Democratic fundraising as hypocritical and reliant on out-of-state elite interests

0 +
-7

Frames the SVP as promoting xenophobic and economically irresponsible policies

0 +
-8

Implies party loyalty undermines institutional independence

0 +
-5

Associates party with defiance of legal and institutional constraints

0 +
-5

Portrays Democratic actors as upholding institutional norms

0 +
+5

Portrays Democratic actors as effective in using legal channels to challenge executive actions

0 +
+4

Portrays the Democratic Party as unfairly targeted by scrutiny over personal conduct

0 +
+6

Portrays Democratic lawmakers as holding Wall Street accountable

0 +
+3

Portrays the Democratic Party as ideologically resentful and out of touch with American values of innovation and success.

0 +
-8

Frames Republican 'Never Trump' conservatives as morally principled critics of Democratic hypocrisy, giving weight to their accusations of double standards.

0 +
-7

Portrays Democratic Party as morally inconsistent by highlighting perceived hypocrisy in downplaying candidate character issues after criticizing Trump.

0 +
-8

Associates the party with populist and restrictive policies through critical framing and opposing expert voices

0 +
-5

Frames internal party dynamics as chaotic and destabilizing

0 +
-6

Portrays left-wing political criticism as irrational hostility toward Musk’s success

0 +
-6

Associates the party with alarmist and simplistic policy solutions

0 +
-5

Portrays the SVP as exploiting a violent incident to advance its political agenda

0 +
-5

Portrays the party as promoting exclusionary policies under the guise of sustainability

0 +
-4

Portrays Conservatives as critical and oppositional on defence policy

0 +
-5

Frames the SVP as a xenophobic, dominant force promoting exclusionary policies

0 +
-7

Depicts the conservative political faction in South Korea as legally and morally compromised.

0 +
-5

Portrays the Democratic Party as weak, negligent, and responsible for national insecurity

0 +
-7

Implies alignment between Irish political stance and progressive internationalism by omission of conservative viewpoints

0 +
+6

Framed as dismissive of humanitarian concerns, using Vatican policy to deflect moral critique

0 +
-4

Depicts the party as internally fractured and leadership as unstable, threatening its governing legitimacy.

0 +
-7

Portrays the Labour Party as internally divided and unfit to govern on national security

0 +
-7

Depicts the Democratic Party as morally culpable for violent crime by protecting undocumented immigrants over citizens

0 +
-9

Portrays Democratic-aligned labor and immigration stances as morally justified and popular

0 +
+6

Frames Labour Party leadership dynamics as chaotic and self-serving rather than policy-driven

0 +
-7

Suggests internal Democratic dysfunction and lack of accountability through Hunter Biden’s grievances and Newsom’s deference

0 +
-5

Frames Labour Party as betraying veterans through legislation

0 +
-9

Frames Democrats as dishonest and fiscally irresponsible in budget process

0 +
-7

Frames the Kuomintang as a reasonable, peace-seeking alternative to Taiwan’s ruling party

0 +
+4

Frames Reform Party as internally divided, inauthentic, and compromised by its candidate's past

0 +
-8

Implies party-aligned actors are undermining institutional integrity

0 +
-4

Implicates California Democrats in endangering migrant children for political narrative

0 +
-7

Associates the party with political cronyism and institutional manipulation

0 +
-5

Associates Labour Party leadership with disciplined, patriotic, and battle-tested figures

0 +
+5

Implies party actors may be using state mechanisms to suppress intra-party competition

0 +
-5

Implies Republican candidates like Steve Hilton offer superior, pro-business policies without detailing them

0 +
+7

Indirectly favors Republican-aligned actors by omitting Democratic or institutional pushback

0 +
+3

Associates the party with sycophantic governance through the portrayal of the Kennedy Center board

0 +
-5

Associates the Democratic Party with progressive policies that invite federal intervention

0 +
-3

Portrays the Republican Party as engaging in exclusionary tactics to protect incumbents

0 +
-6

Frames Democratic opposition as politically motivated rather than institutionally principled

0 +
-5

Portrays the Green Party as institutionally failing to address antisemitism and enabling extremism

0 +
-8

Frames the National Republican Senatorial Committee as attempting to weaponize election administration against a minor candidate

0 +
-5

Suggests Republican figures use media appearances opportunistically for self-promotion

0 +
-5

Subtly questions the legitimacy of legal challenges associated with Democratic appointees by foregrounding the judge's Obama affiliation

0 +
-3

Amplifies Democratic voices framing the investigation as an attack on democracy

0 +
+6

Portrays Republican-led political decision-making as undermining clean energy initiatives for partisan gain.

0 +
-7

Frames Democratic Party as shifting toward punitive immigration positions, implying internal contradiction or reversal

0 +
-5

Frames the Democratic Party as internally divided and ideologically extreme, particularly on immigration and gun rights

0 +
-6

Suggests internal dysfunction and poor judgment in leadership choices, mocking its administrative logic

0 +
-6

Portrays the party as internally divided and unfit for national security leadership

0 +
-6

Portrays the party as internally fractured and failing on core governance responsibilities

0 +
-6

Portrays the Democratic Party as exploiting racial narratives for political agitation

0 +
-8

Suggests internal division and desperation within the Democratic Party, particularly among progressive factions

0 +
-5

Indirectly favoring liberal political forces by reinforcing narrative of conservative leader's downfall

0 +
+3

Portrays the Democratic Party as targeted in politically motivated violence

0 +
-6

Framed as strategically effective in preventing progressive threat

0 +
+7

Frames Republicans as primarily motivated by self-promotion and book sales

0 +
-6

Republican Party framed as a resurgent, unified force under Trump's leadership

0 +
+7

Associates red-state governance with economic success and national strength

0 +
+7

Frames Democrats as obstructionist on national security matters

0 +
-3

Frames Democrats as obstructing national security for partisan reasons

0 +
-6

Suggests historical misrepresentation of economic causes eroded trust and fueled Brexit sentiment

0 +
-4

Frames Democrats as institutionally responsible by linking their opposition to safeguarding surveillance law integrity

0 +
+6

Portrays the Labour Party as internally divided and lacking strategic clarity in leadership selection

0 +
-5

Frames Democratic Party figures as defending controversial candidates with minimal accountability

0 +
-5

Portrays internal GOP divisions as damaging to party unity and electoral prospects

0 +
-4

Portrays the Democratic Party as internally divided and prone to racially charged rhetoric

0 +
-6

Associates the party with controversial executive actions

0 +
-3

Emphasizes internal party divisions and potential leadership instability

0 +
-7

Implies that the far-right Vox party is politically toxic and out of step with the pope’s moral vision

0 +
-6

Portrays Reform Party as extremist and racially inflammatory

0 +
-7

Portrays the party dynamics as chaotic, internally divided, and incapable of coherent national strategy

0 +
-7

Suggests internal disarray and leadership instability within the party

0 +
-6

Suggests GOP candidate engages in ethically ambiguous financial practices

0 +
-4

Suggests internal disunity and weak leadership within the Labour Party

0 +
-5

Indirect negative framing of centre-left political leadership

0 +
-3

Frames the Labour Party as institutionally collapsing due to leadership failure and internal disarray

0 +
-8

Suggests the SNP is a target of foreign influence due to its foreign policy stance

0 +
-3

Suggests internal disunity and weakening leadership within the Labour Party, undermining its governance capacity.

0 +
-6

Implies internal disarray and impending leadership crisis within the Labour Party

0 +
-7

Portrays Labour as ideologically reckless and unfit to govern on national security

0 +
-9

Depicts the Labour Party as internally fractured and losing credibility

0 +
-7

Presents Reform Party's polling lead as established fact without data or context

0 +
+6

Associates the party with internal discord over national security appointments

0 +
-3

Depicts the Labour Party as internally divided and failing in governance

0 +
-8

Portrays Democrats as prioritizing political ideology over public safety and responsible governance

0 +
-9

Suggests internal division and ideological tension within the Democratic Party, particularly between progressives and establishment figures

0 +
-3

Portrays the Labour Party as internally divided and pressured into unpopular welfare cuts

0 +
-6

Portrays the DUP as using inflammatory rhetoric that contributes to racial tension.

0 +
-7

Portrayed as insufficiently fighting for working-class interests

0 +
-5

Portrays Labor as ineffective and targeted for removal by populist rhetoric

0 +
-4