Trump-Endorsed Wilson Thrashes Trump-Endorsed Evette In SC Gubernatorial Race 58%

By Ashley Brasfield0%

6/23/2026, 7:43:25 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Negativity Bias, and Self-Serving Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 34% saturation with 126 hits. Analysis detected 987 faulty-reasoning hits from 371 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.5% and a BS Rank of 58% (9,061 of 21,176 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 57.20% of the article peer group.

South Carolina Republicans handed Republican Attorney General Alan Wilson a victory over Lt. 
Gov. 
Pamela Evette in the Tuesday’s high-stakes gubernatorial runoff. 
Wilson’s win positions him to become the frontrunner to replace term-limited GOP Gov. 
Henry McMaster in the ruby-red state. 
(RELATED: Nancy Mace Concedes South Carolina Gubernatorial Primary After Failing To Gain Trump’s Support) 
NBC News called the election shortly after polls closed. 
With 8% of the vote counted, Wilson led Evette 65.5% to 34.5%. 
Wilson’s win caps months of intense campaigning in a race that exposed divisions within South Carolina’s GOP establishment and became a proxy battle over the party’s future direction. 
President Donald Trump initially threw his support behind South Carolina Lt. 
Gov. 
Pamela Evette, giving her his “Complete and Total Endorsement” in a Truth Social post on May 29 ahead of the state’s crowded Republican gubernatorial primary. 
Trump praised Evette as a loyal ally and early supporter of his political movement, and the endorsement was widely viewed as a major boost to her campaign. 
Evette went on to finish first in the June 9 primary, winning 28.9% of the vote to Wilson’s 26.1% and soundly defeating headline-grabbing Rep. 
Nancy Mace, who finished fifth. 
(RELATED: Trump Endorses Against GOP Congresswoman Who Defied Him On Epstein Files) 
But just weeks later, Trump shifted course. 
On Friday, ahead of the June 23 runoff, he announced that he would endorse both Evette and Wilson, calling the two Republicans “MAGA and America First all the way.” 
In the Truth Social post, Trump said he could not bring himself to hurt one candidate by endorsing the other, writing that South Carolina Republicans could not go wrong with either choice. 
The unusual move effectively muddied what had previously been a clear endorsement. 
While Evette continued to tout Trump’s backing as a key asset, Wilson immediately claimed Trump’s support as well, leaving Republican voters with the rare scenario of choosing between two candidates both carrying the president’s endorsement into the runoff. 
(RELATED: South Carolina HOA Suddenly Decides To Ban Residents From Carrying Guns In ‘Shared Spaces’) 
Wilson will face Democratic South Carolina State Representative Jermaine Johnson in November’s general election and is heavily favored to win. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.6%Ashley Brasfield: 4.8%The Daily Caller: 5.0%Confirmation Bias14.6%This article: 3.2%Ashley Brasfield: 1.6%The Daily Caller: 0.7%Anchoring Bias3.2%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 1.8%The Daily Caller: 2.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.5%Ashley Brasfield: 1.0%The Daily Caller: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic3.5%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 1.0%The Daily Caller: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 1.7%The Daily Caller: 3.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 34.0%Ashley Brasfield: 12.9%The Daily Caller: 10.4%Framing Effect34.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 16.4%Ashley Brasfield: 0.9%The Daily Caller: 2.7%Optimism Bias16.4%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 2.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 19.4%Ashley Brasfield: 6.2%The Daily Caller: 8.2%Negativity Bias19.4%This article: 18.9%Ashley Brasfield: 1.6%The Daily Caller: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias18.9%This article: 3.5%Ashley Brasfield: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error3.5%This article: 3.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.1%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias3.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 2.6%The Daily Caller: 1.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 1.2%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 14.0%Ashley Brasfield: 1.7%The Daily Caller: 1.6%Halo Effect14.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.9%Ashley Brasfield: 1.2%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Recency Bias1.9%This article: 5.4%Ashley Brasfield: 0.4%The Daily Caller: 0.6%Primacy Effect5.4%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.3%The Daily Caller: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.9%The Daily Caller: 1.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 22.6%Ashley Brasfield: 7.2%The Daily Caller: 4.6%Appeal to Authority22.6%This article: 10.2%Ashley Brasfield: 1.6%The Daily Caller: 2.9%False Dilemma10.2%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.3%The Daily Caller: 2.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.5%Ashley Brasfield: 1.4%The Daily Caller: 6.3%Hasty Generalization3.5%This article: 11.1%Ashley Brasfield: 0.5%The Daily Caller: 0.4%Red Herring11.1%This article: 7.3%Ashley Brasfield: 0.9%The Daily Caller: 1.0%Bandwagon7.3%This article: 7.3%Ashley Brasfield: 4.0%The Daily Caller: 5.7%Appeal to Emotion7.3%This article: 16.2%Ashley Brasfield: 1.0%The Daily Caller: 2.1%Begging the Question16.2%This article: 3.8%Ashley Brasfield: 3.8%The Daily Caller: 3.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.8%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.3%The Daily Caller: 0.9%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.4%The Daily Caller: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.0%Ashley Brasfield: 3.0%The Daily Caller: 1.5%Anecdotal4.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 10.5%Ashley Brasfield: 0.5%The Daily Caller: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)10.5%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.8%Ashley Brasfield: 0.3%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Middle Ground7.8%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.3%Ashley Brasfield: 4.2%The Daily Caller: 2.2%Unattributed Quote7.3%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 2.4%The Daily Caller: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 8.9%Ashley Brasfield: 3.9%The Daily Caller: 8.5%Biased Writer Voice8.9%This article: 7.8%Ashley Brasfield: 2.6%The Daily Caller: 3.6%Indoctrination7.8%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.0%The Daily Caller: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 5.2%The Daily Caller: 5.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ashley Brasfield: 0.6%The Daily Caller: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

371 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers29%attributed speech265writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageNBC News • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 29 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
97 attributed words92% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Indoctrination+29.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Donald Trump: 29.9%29.9%Biased Writer Voice-12.5 ptsWriter: 12.5%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-10.2 ptsWriter: 10.2%Donald Trump: 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.