Salon.com76%

How long can this "Weekend at Bernie's" presidency go on? 50%

By Brian Karem0%

6/26/2026, 1:00:25 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Biased Writer Voice, and Overconfidence Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 19.2% saturation with 351 hits. Analysis detected 2,183 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,831 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 50.1% and a BS Rank of 50% (10,726 of 21,179 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 50.60% of the article peer group.

With Donald Trump‘s refusal to sign a bipartisan housing bill that Republicans hoped might save them from doom in the upcoming midterms, even GOP members of Congress are now openly viewing the president with anger and derision. 
Senate Majority Leader John Thune laughed out loud when asked about Trump’s abrupt cancellation of the planned White House signing ceremony. 
Other House Republicans weren’t as nice. 
“It’s a f**ing s**t show, isn’t it?” 
one member told me. 
“It’s always about him. 
That’s his only idea. 
He’s nuts.” 
We no longer live in a nation known for its bright ideas  at least not since the Kennedy era  and some would argue you’d have to go as far back as Teddy Roosevelt. 
But Trump’s obstinacy over a housing bill that passed Congress with a huge majority, combined with his horrible deal to extricate the U.S. from the Iran war and the grotesque algae bloom in the Reflecting Pool, make it apparent that Trump fever has finally broken on Capitol Hill. 
Sen. 
Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who was among a group of Senate Republicans meeting with Trump on Wednesday, reportedly ended up in a shouting match some observers ranked as a “seven out of 10.” 
On what? 
The Richter scale, I suppose. 
Some inside the room compared it to “two boys at recess yelling at each other over a foul on the basketball court.” 
Cassidy said afterward that Trump has asked him,”Why would anybody vote for the War Powers Act?” 
The senator said he responded, “Is that a rhetorical question, or would you like to really know?” 
Trump said he really wanted to know. 
So Cassidy told him. 
Many Republicans believe Trump simply went too far by waging war on Iran without even consulting Congress. 
For the first time, they banded together to stand up to him. 
Of course it didn’t last. 
As if on cue, late Wednesday night the Senate walked back its resolution aimed at removing U.S. military forces from Iran. 
I guess Trump can still out-yell everyone. 
He still wants to be the king, and of course he loves the limelight. 
Some members of Congress think Trump is just stalling on the bipartisan housing bill for dramatic effect, so he can take a big bow for signing it a few days down the line. 
Sen. 
Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., appearing on MSNBC, said she had no idea what was going on with Trump. 
“You got the wrong person” if you want to get inside the president’s head, she said. 
I know very few who want to do that, but a great many who think that Trump’s claim of a new American ”golden age” is “pure horses**t.” 
“So what happens when you can’t trust the media, politicians, entertainment, education and healthcare?” 
That question came from the chief of staff for a prominent member of Congress. 
I honestly don’t know, but the question is intriguing. 
Our society is getting a lot of things wrong, it appears. 
But hope springs eternal. 
I know for sure that Trump fever is breaking because several prominent figures in the GOP are now considering their options  at least in private or among close friends  when the day finally comes that the 80-year-old president is no longer around. 
“Some of us are wondering if it will be sooner than later,” a junior member of Congress said. 
Some folks, including a few inside Trump’s administration, have started to refer to the whole enterprise as “Weekend at Bernie’s”  referring to the legendary 1989 comedy in which two aides try to pass off their dead boss as alive. 
Meanwhile, there are those who wet their lips and whisper about “impeachment” as if it might really happen. 
Please. 
Sit down. 
No Democrat will make a move on that before the midterms. 
As I’ve repeatedly said, they will only do so after those elections if they win control of both houses of Congress, and know they have the votes to convict him. 
(Which isn’t likely, no matter what.) 
Members on both sides of the aisle, and even members of Trump’s staff, are more concerned that the president will roll over like a cockroach and start spouting gibberish (if he hasn’t done that already) or that he simply won’t survive his full term, which still has 940 days to go. 
In both cases, “Weekend at Bernie’s” is the proper analogy. 
“This administration is dead in the water,” another Republican congressman told me. 
Or on the other hand, maybe not. 
Many Republicans and some Democrats are concerned by the recent primary victories of what some call “Blue MAGA” or the “Democratic Tea Party,” meaning far-left socialists or progressives. 
“They will breathe life into the Republican Party,” said Joe Walsh, a former GOP congressman turned Trump critic. 
Trump himself posted “congratulations” to Zohran Mamdani shortly after three candidates the New York mayor backed took down mainstream Democrats in city’s districts. 
“Mayor Mamdani pulled through 3 solid Communists, and has received loud and universal applause from the Fake News Media,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 
“Congratulations Mr. 
Mayor!” 
Moderate Democrats have also expressed fear that those NYC rebels’ victories could undermine the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate in November (the House is pretty much in the bag). 
That does not ameliorate Republicans’ growing fears, and Democrats’ growing excitement, that the “Weekend at Bernie’s” regime can’t possibly last much longer. 
Behind the scenes, there’s a lot of scrambling among Republicans that’s starting to look more like panic than strategy. 
Among Trump’s staff, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is the favorite to take advantage of the president’s faltering presence, though some true believers see Rubio as “part of the deep state,” which in the regime’s parlance means that he is somewhat civil and professional in public. 
Vice President JD Vance would, of course, be the immediate beneficiary of Trump’s literal or political demise. 
He’s already out front, supposedly negotiating peace with Iran. 
Some believe Rubio maneuvered Vance into that position so when the peace deal fails it will fall on him and not Rubio  which would be beneficial for the latter’s chances in 2028. 
Trump has outright confessed he’s using Vance that way. 
If the peace talks succeed, Trump will claim credit. 
If they fail, he’ll blame the vice president. 
Meanwhile, the Democrats are staring at a whole lot of candidates whose stated goals for office haven’t advanced much beyond metaphorically or actually flipping the bird at Trump. 
That might be enough to win the next election, because most of the world feels the same way, but it’s an extremely short-sighted strategy. 
So what else is new in politics? 
The Republican Party should not be electable for the next 50 years, given its inexcusable actions during the Trump regime. 
But the Democrats haven’t done a whole lot better. 
We are at a crossroads. 
Going forward, Republicans will have two strategies. 
Behind the scenes they will continue to jockey for position after Trump leaves, while using progressive victories in New York to tag the Democrats with the “communist” label. 
They will go down fighting, so we’re going to hear an awful lot about “socialists,” “communists,” “Marxists” and “radicals,” at least until the end of the midterms, even as they try to keep the “Weekend at Bernie’s” routine going. 
Make no mistake; the palace is on fire and the king is asleep  literally. 
Photos of Trump asleep in public are everywhere and drive home the agonizing “Bernie’s”-themed memes being shared among GOP staffers. 
If Republicans can distance themselves from Trump, and paint the Democrats as too far left, there’s an outside chance they can stave off electoral disaster  but don’t expect them to help out the American people in any meaningful way in the process, unless it benefits them directly. 
Furthermore, don’t expect Trump to leave office of his own accord, even if he does survive to the end of his term. 
Don’t expect an impeachment, no matter what gossip you’re hearing, and don’t expect the Democrats to be overly effective. 
Keep your expectations seriously low. 
Let’s begin with not flushing the country down the tubes this fall. 
Trump loves to claim that our country is the hottest on the planet. 
It was dead before he came along, according to his standard stump speech. 
But make no mistake  it’s Trumpism that’s now dead. 
The heat we’re all feeling is from climate change, and being too close to the flames of perdition. 
We live in a country run by divisive politicians and an incoherent media, and full of people who are increasingly confused and overwhelmed. 
But if and when Trump finally leaves office, the possibilities for solving the problems he’s created will expand exponentially. 
Right now, we have to pass through the eye of a needle, and a limited number of possibilities could get us there. 
Trump could die in office. 
He could be removed from office. 
He could stay and live out his term. 
Democrats could win both the House and Senate. 
They could fail to do that, and things will remain as they are  or keep getting worse. 
Trump is increasingly lethargic, unintelligible and addicted to cosplaying commander in chief for the cameras. 
White House reporters, meanwhile, are preparing for the day  perhaps a day when they serve as pool reporter  when they get the call about a calamity befalling the president. 
That might happen. 
But the midterm elections loom large, or even enormous, in any calculations about the future. 
Trump will try to suppress votes. 
The GOP will scream that the election is rigged should a Democratic majority emerge in the House, the Senate or both. 
Democrats will scream that the fix is in and the GOP engaged in voter suppression if they fail to win one or both houses. 
If we want hope, we must count on the volunteers of both parties in precincts all over the country who will be working the elections to ensure an honest outcome. 
That is where I have the most faith. 
I have interviewed, worked with and engaged with volunteers  both as a reporter and a volunteer myself  since 1979. 
I have never doubted the tireless efforts of those who work the elections. 
This year our democracy is at stake. 
That might be a cliché, but this time it’s literally true. 
Let the chips fall where they may. 
Let it be free and fair and without strife, as much as possible. 
Every voter needs to accept responsibility for ensuring they are registered, and must jump through whatever hoops are necessary in order to cast a vote in November. 
The peaceful transfer of power is a cornerstone of what makes this country great. 
Imagine the possibility, through all the strife, anger, ignorance and arrogance, that we might all work together to put country before party. 
That’s something worth fighting for. 
And with the Trump fever breaking, it can be done. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.0%Brian Karem: 7.7%Salon: 5.2%Confirmation Bias5.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.3%Salon: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Brian Karem: 1.9%Salon: 3.1%Availability Heuristic4.2%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 1.3%Salon: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 1.9%Brian Karem: 1.6%Salon: 1.0%Hindsight Bias1.9%This article: 8.8%Brian Karem: 7.3%Salon: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias8.8%This article: 4.9%Brian Karem: 8.8%Salon: 7.3%Framing Effect4.9%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.1%Salon: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.5%Salon: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.9%Brian Karem: 1.4%Salon: 1.4%Optimism Bias4.9%This article: 7.2%Brian Karem: 3.2%Salon: 2.2%Pessimism Bias7.2%This article: 19.2%Brian Karem: 13.4%Salon: 10.8%Negativity Bias19.2%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.5%Salon: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Brian Karem: 4.9%Salon: 2.1%Fundamental Attribution Error1.9%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.3%Salon: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Brian Karem: 2.3%Salon: 1.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias4.4%This article: 0.4%Brian Karem: 0.1%Salon: 2.4%Halo Effect0.4%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.6%Salon: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Brian Karem: 0.3%Salon: 0.5%Primacy Effect1.9%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.0%Brian Karem: 4.8%Salon: 3.4%Ad Hominem3.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 1.3%Salon: 1.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 3.9%Salon: 3.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.8%Brian Karem: 1.9%Salon: 2.3%False Dilemma0.8%This article: 3.9%Brian Karem: 1.0%Salon: 1.5%Slippery Slope3.9%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.2%Brian Karem: 11.5%Salon: 10.6%Hasty Generalization16.2%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.1%Salon: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.4%Salon: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.3%Brian Karem: 6.2%Salon: 5.9%Appeal to Emotion8.3%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 1.8%Salon: 1.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 2.8%Brian Karem: 4.1%Salon: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.8%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 1.8%Salon: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.1%Salon: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 1.0%Salon: 0.6%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.2%Brian Karem: 3.0%Salon: 2.5%Anecdotal1.2%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.2%Salon: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 1.8%Salon: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.1%Salon: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.0%Salon: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.2%Brian Karem: 3.3%Salon: 2.1%Unattributed Quote0.2%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.8%Salon: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 12.2%Brian Karem: 19.3%Salon: 15.1%Biased Writer Voice12.2%This article: 2.1%Brian Karem: 1.8%Salon: 2.7%Indoctrination2.1%This article: 2.5%Brian Karem: 2.0%Salon: 7.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias2.5%This article: 1.3%Brian Karem: 0.2%Salon: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias1.3%This article: 0.0%Brian Karem: 0.5%Salon: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1831 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers7.9%attributed speech1,686writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 48 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 16 words • 0.0% coverageBill Cassidy • 17 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 7 words • 0.0% coverageBill Cassidy • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageElizabeth Warren • 17 words • 0.0% coverageElizabeth Warren • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 51 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJoe Walsh • 18 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 23 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 24 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 2 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 48 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Joe Walsh

100%flagged-word coverage
18 attributed words12% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-13.3 ptsWriter: 13.3%Joe Walsh: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-2.7 ptsWriter: 2.7%Joe Walsh: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-2.3 ptsWriter: 2.3%Joe Walsh: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-0.2 ptsWriter: 0.2%Joe Walsh: 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.