SNL fave Nate Bargatze riles fans by joining ‘MAGA royalty’ at Trump’s UFC birthday event 82%

By Martha Ross0%

6/16/2026, 4:13:27 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Unattributed Quote, and Burden of Proof, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 67.3% saturation with 466 hits. Analysis detected 2,366 faulty-reasoning hits from 692 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 73.9% and a BS Rank of 82% (3,936 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.00% of the article peer group.

Nate Bargatze, who has become one of America’s top-selling stand-up comedians by presenting himself as an amiable family man who only tells “clean” jokes, is facing backlash for being photographed in the company of Robert F. 
Kennedy Jr. and other “MAGA royalty” at Donald Trump’s UFC birthday bash at the White House. 
Bargatze’s fans have long wondered about his politics and speculated that the Nashville-born entertainer and popular “Saturday Night Live” guest host leans conservative, but he has always managed to avoid being publicly pulled into partisan discussions. 
But fans now believe they have confirmation that he’s a Trump supporter, thanks to RFK Jr.’s wife, Cheryl Hines. 
The former TV star posted a selfie of herself, her controversial husband and Bargatze at the UFC Freedom 250 event  with Vice President J.D. 
Vance in the background, according to the Daily Beast. 
On Bargatze’s X account, fans are accusing Bargatze, an avowed Christian, of being “a coward” and “a hypocrite” because he appears to be quietly aligning himself with Trump, a convicted felon who has been impeached twice and who has been accused of sexually harassing or assaulting more than two dozen women. 
“WTF, @natebargatze,” one person asked. 
“Showing up with Cheryl (Hines) & RFK to celebrate a piece of (expletive) who allowed a fighter to hurl insults at M Obama. 
I guess you are a good actor, because, if that’s your circle….count me, and several others, the (expletive) out.” 
That person is referring to heavyweight Josh Hokit, who is facing widespread backlash for making a vile joke about former first lady Michelle Obama after winning his match over Derrick Lewis. 
In front of the president and his family, Hokit seemed to be trying to court MAGA fans by appealing to one of their more base conspiracy theories, gleefully announcing, “Michelle Obama is a man! 
Am I right America?” 
“And just like that, in one fell swoop, you’re cancelled in our household,” one person said to Bargatze. 
“Disappointed, but not surprised.” 
And a third asked Bargatze why he doesn’t have the courage to come out and say whether or not he supports Trump  “a man accused of so many immoral things that (you) readily say (are) immoral  why don’t (you) have the Christian courage (to) tell us?” 
Indeed, Bargatze, who gained widespread fame for playing George Washington in a viral, crossing-the-Delaware sketch on “Saturday Night Live” in 2023, has shared nothing about his UFC event appearance with his 3.1 million Instagram followers. 
He also has said nothing on X about seeing the violent cage fights on the White House lawn. 
The fact that he has done neither raises questions about whether he was hoping his presence at the UFC event would not become public, reasonably aware that he would risk alienating liberal fans by celebrating Trump’s 80th birthday. 
Many celebrities who received invitations declined to attend, including Adam Sandler, Tom Brady, Guy Ritchie, Jared Leto, Jason Statham, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and Mario Lopez, the Daily Beast also reported. 
Someone else said Bargatze, who also guest-hosted “Saturday Night Live” in 2024, can’t use the excuse that he only went to Trump’s birthday party because he likes UFC fighting. 
But if Bargatze is silent, people on X have plenty of things to say to him, including, “Noooooooo! 
I’m so so so disappointed. 
A massive fan. 
Saw you at the Chicago theatre. 
Learning this about you is crushing. 
I’m heartsunk.” 
Another person asked, “Did you write the Michelle Obama “joke’ or just laugh along?” 
This controversy comes at a challenging time for Bargatze, who’s currently on a stand-up comedy tour that brings him to such sizable venues as San Jose’s SAP Center on July 17. 
It also comes as his new film, “The Breadwinner,” has been hit with scathing reviews and questions about whether he can turn his stand-up appeal into movie stardom. 
Variety called the humor “dated,” while other critics said the film is “a pathetic Mr. 
Mom ripoff” and Bargatze lacks charisma and “is the absolute pits at co-writing and starring in his first feature film.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.7%Martha Ross: 7.0%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Confirmation Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 16.8%Martha Ross: 4.2%newyorkdailynews: 3.4%Availability Heuristic16.8%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 1.3%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 5.5%Martha Ross: 2.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.0%Hindsight Bias5.5%This article: 2.9%Martha Ross: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias2.9%This article: 7.2%Martha Ross: 7.8%newyorkdailynews: 6.1%Framing Effect7.2%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%Martha Ross: 1.4%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Pessimism Bias5.8%This article: 67.3%Martha Ross: 35.3%newyorkdailynews: 9.8%Negativity Bias67.3%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 14.3%Martha Ross: 5.4%newyorkdailynews: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error14.3%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 7.2%Martha Ross: 3.1%newyorkdailynews: 1.3%In-Group Bias7.2%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 2.5%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Martha Ross: 2.6%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Halo Effect5.2%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 10.3%Martha Ross: 2.6%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Primacy Effect10.3%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 16.3%Martha Ross: 18.7%newyorkdailynews: 1.2%Ad Hominem16.3%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 1.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.9%Martha Ross: 2.0%newyorkdailynews: 3.2%Appeal to Authority7.9%This article: 6.2%Martha Ross: 4.6%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%False Dilemma6.2%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 14.6%Martha Ross: 10.0%newyorkdailynews: 4.1%Hasty Generalization14.6%This article: 4.5%Martha Ross: 1.1%newyorkdailynews: 0.3%Red Herring4.5%This article: 10.4%Martha Ross: 4.6%newyorkdailynews: 0.4%Bandwagon10.4%This article: 27.7%Martha Ross: 12.6%newyorkdailynews: 7.4%Appeal to Emotion27.7%This article: 2.7%Martha Ross: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Begging the Question2.7%This article: 2.6%Martha Ross: 0.7%newyorkdailynews: 3.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.6%This article: 6.9%Martha Ross: 1.7%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Tu Quoque6.9%This article: 18.6%Martha Ross: 4.7%newyorkdailynews: 0.5%Burden of Proof18.6%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.7%Martha Ross: 1.9%newyorkdailynews: 2.6%Anecdotal7.7%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 26.9%Martha Ross: 14.7%newyorkdailynews: 2.1%Unattributed Quote26.9%This article: 1.4%Martha Ross: 0.5%newyorkdailynews: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection1.4%This article: 16.6%Martha Ross: 12.5%newyorkdailynews: 6.7%Biased Writer Voice16.6%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 3.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 16.5%Martha Ross: 15.7%newyorkdailynews: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias16.5%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Martha Ross: 0.0%newyorkdailynews: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

692 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker0.6%attributed speech688writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 51 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageJosh Hokit • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 48 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Josh Hokit

100%flagged-word coverage
4 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+73.5 ptsWriter: 26.5%Josh Hokit: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-16.7 ptsWriter: 16.7%Josh Hokit: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-16.6 ptsWriter: 16.6%Josh Hokit: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.5 ptsWriter: 1.5%Josh Hokit: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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