Spencer Pratt’s lead over Nithya Raman withers in bombshell ballot drop 57%

By Jamie Paige0%

6/7/2026, 12:22:14 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Framing Effect, with Recency Bias as the most egregious example at 71.9% saturation with 141 hits. Analysis detected 853 faulty-reasoning hits from 196 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.1% and a BS Rank of 57% (9,214 of 21,198 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 56.50% of the article peer group.

Spencer Pratt’s once-comfortable lead in the Los Angeles mayoral primary has been slashed yet again  as a fresh batch of ballots delivered another major boost to progressive City Councilmember Nithya Raman in their race to the November runoff. 
New results released Saturday show Pratt's advantage over Raman shrinking to just 7,494 votes, down from more than 20,000 a day earlier. 
Roughly 78% of the ballots had been counted as of Saturday. 
Raman picked up 23,514 votes in the latest count, more than double Pratt's gain of 10,336. 
Her share of the vote jumped from 24.9% to 26.2%, while Pratt slipped from 28.2% to 27.3%. 
The latest mayoral numbers were released as movement in the governor's race remained far more limited. 
Former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra continued to lead the field with 1,732,755 votes, or 26.8%, while Republican Steve Hilton remained close behind with 1,704,821 votes, or 26.4%. 
Billionaire businessman Tom Steyer held third place with 1,361,549 votes, or 21.0%, showing little change from Friday's results and failing to gain ground on Hilton in the race for a spot in November's runoff. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.2%Jamie Paige: 5.3%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias8.2%This article: 11.2%Jamie Paige: 1.0%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias11.2%This article: 8.2%Jamie Paige: 5.7%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic8.2%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.4%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.3%California Post: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 2.0%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 42.3%Jamie Paige: 14.3%California Post: 10.4%Framing Effect42.3%This article: 28.6%Jamie Paige: 0.8%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion28.6%This article: 17.3%Jamie Paige: 1.2%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias17.3%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.2%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 2.1%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 51.5%Jamie Paige: 15.8%California Post: 16.1%Negativity Bias51.5%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 2.6%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.4%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 2.0%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.1%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.8%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.2%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 71.9%Jamie Paige: 2.6%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias71.9%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.5%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 2.5%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.8%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 15.3%Jamie Paige: 2.9%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority15.3%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 2.7%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.5%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.2%Jamie Paige: 8.3%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization8.2%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.9%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.8%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 23.0%Jamie Paige: 9.5%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion23.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.7%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 25.5%Jamie Paige: 3.6%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)25.5%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.8%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.6%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 4.5%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 19.9%Jamie Paige: 2.2%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)19.9%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.7%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground8.7%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.2%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 0.2%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 2.4%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.8%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 51.5%Jamie Paige: 12.5%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice51.5%This article: 15.3%Jamie Paige: 1.3%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination15.3%This article: 28.6%Jamie Paige: 0.9%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias28.6%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 4.7%California Post: 3.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jamie Paige: 1.2%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

196 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.