Salon76%

Trump’s slow-motion dismantling of elections 66%

By Chauncey DeVega80%

7/14/2026, 10:45:27 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Left Leaning Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 46.7% saturation with 489 hits. Analysis detected 2,618 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,047 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 59.9% and a BS Rank of 66% (7,507 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 65.70% of the article peer group.

There is a growing sense among many pro-democracy Americans and the public at large that Trumpism and the MAGA are not forever. 
Several prominent voices have been channeling Winston Churchill , who marked the British victory at El Alamein in World War II by proclaiming: “Now this is not the end. 
It is not even the beginning of the end. 
But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” 
In reality, Trump’s MAGA coalition is continuing to attack and wear down American democracy and society. 
His shock-and-awe campaign may have lost its thunderous momentum, but the offensive never stopped. 
On Thursday, the president removed the remaining members of the bipartisan federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC). 
The two Democrats were fired. 
The third member, a Republican, resigned in protest. 
This little-known commission was formed after the chaos of the contested 2000 presidential race between George W. 
Bush and Al Gore to help states improve their elections by administering grants, testing voting systems and maintaining the national voter registration form. 
New ICE boss, same old lies 
The administration justified this unprecedented move by citing the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. 
Slaughter, which handed the president new power to fire the heads of “independent agencies” without cause. 
So why now? 
The EAC refused to support Trump’s push to include a citizenship question on voter registration forms. 
This is part of a much larger campaign to manipulate and take control of the country’s elections in the name of security and stopping fraud to guarantee wins for Trump and MAGA Republicans in the November midterms, the 2028 presidential contest and beyond. 
Michael Waldman, president and CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice, called the move “deeply concerning in light of [Trump’s] relentless efforts to try to interfere in elections.” 
Congress built the EAC to be bipartisan by design, Waldman said, and “these removals leave the agency without leadership and unable to carry out its major responsibilities.” 
Donald K. 
Sherman, president of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) put it more bluntly : This is “creeping authoritarianism.” 
Trump still believes his own Big Lie: Any election he or his MAGA Republicans lose is, by definition, automatically fraudulent or otherwise illegitimate. 
On March 31, Trump signed an executive order that would change America’s elections by restricting mail-in voting and requiring proof of citizenship. 
In a series of decisions last month, federal district judges in Boston have ruled against these executive orders. 
Meanwhile, Trump’s Department of Justice is suing states for voter data and access to voter rolls . 
The president is also demanding that congressional Republicans pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would require proof of citizenship to vote. 
In a story that has gotten far too little attention, Trump has also placed prominent 2020 election deniers in key positions throughout the country’s election infrastructure, systematically dismantling America’s defenses against interference by foreign and other malign actors in the country’s elections. 
In February 2025, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, ceased its election security activities pending a review. 
This was accompanied by staff cuts by the Department of Government Efficiency, which included the agency’s election security advisers 
The Brennan Center’s new report the “Threat of Foreign Influence on U.S. 
Elections Remain as Federal Defenses Recede” summarizes this state of vulnerability this way:  For the first time since the designation of election infrastructure as critical infrastructure, the federal government’s support is notably absent this cycle, representing a new challenge for securing elections from foreign threats.” 
Start your day with essential news from Salon. 
Sign up for our free morning newsletter , Crash Course. 
Trump and his agents have also repeatedly threatened to deploy the military, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and law enforcement to prevent so-called voter fraud by “illegal aliens” in urban areas  euphemism and code for Black and brown people who support Democrats. 
Were this to happen, it would constitute an illegal act of voter intimidation and voter nullification. 
In total, Trump’s moves against the EAC and the larger campaign against multiracial pluralistic democracy are pushing the country ever further towards a state of competitive authoritarianism where elections take place but the outcome is essentially pre-determined in favor of the ruling party. 
There is an old military axiom: The enemy gets a vote too. 
Trump and MAGA and the broader right-wing are still early in their campaign and they will not stop. 
In terms of practical politics, their plans to influence and potentially manipulate the midterms could shift districts  such as Rep. 
Marcy Kaptur’s in Ohio, Rep. 
Don Davis’ in North Carolina and Rep. 
Cleo Fields in Louisiana  from Democratic to Republican in close races. 
The good news is that more Americans are paying attention. 
A recent poll from Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) shows that a majority of Americans correctly identify Trump as being an aspiring dictator and an existential threat to the country’s democracy. 
But awareness of the crisis is not the same as having a plan to defend American democracy and society. 
Our Summer sale is on! 
Support Salon’s bold journalism. 
Annual members save 58% 
The wins so far  in the courts, at the ballot box, in the everyday acts of civil resistance and “good trouble” that have slowed down the administration  are real, and they matter. 
But they are not the same thing as winning a permanent victory. 
This struggle for democracy will be measured in many years and decades. 
It will be a test of willpower and resources. 
On Monday, almost on cue, Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that he will be making a speech to the nation on Thursday night. 
MS NOW reported he will claim that newly declassified “evidence” shows that a foreign power interfered against him in the 2020 election. 
Pro-democracy Americans must not let their guard down and be tempted by good news and unearned optimism. 
about voting and elections 
FBI raids Ohio voter registration nonprofit 
GOP’s bogus claims of fraud pose a dire threat to democracy 
Trump is going all in on the SAVE America Act. 
It could make voting harder for millions 
The post Trump’s slow-motion dismantling of elections appeared first on Salon.com . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.4%Chauncey DeVega: 7.0%Salon: 5.2%Confirmation Bias13.4%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.4%Salon: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Chauncey DeVega: 3.6%Salon: 3.3%Availability Heuristic4.2%This article: 3.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.8%Salon: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic3.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.5%Salon: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Chauncey DeVega: 2.2%Salon: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias2.0%This article: 5.9%Chauncey DeVega: 6.6%Salon: 7.3%Framing Effect5.9%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.4%Salon: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.1%Salon: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 3.2%Chauncey DeVega: 0.2%Salon: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect3.2%This article: 3.1%Chauncey DeVega: 1.1%Salon: 1.4%Optimism Bias3.1%This article: 8.0%Chauncey DeVega: 3.1%Salon: 2.2%Pessimism Bias8.0%This article: 46.7%Chauncey DeVega: 15.0%Salon: 11.0%Negativity Bias46.7%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.1%Salon: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Chauncey DeVega: 2.5%Salon: 2.2%Fundamental Attribution Error3.5%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.6%Chauncey DeVega: 3.1%Salon: 1.9%In-Group Bias6.6%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 1.2%Salon: 1.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 1.2%Salon: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.4%Salon: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.3%Chauncey DeVega: 1.5%Salon: 1.3%Recency Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.3%Salon: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.6%Chauncey DeVega: 2.1%Salon: 3.4%Ad Hominem1.6%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 1.3%Salon: 1.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 15.4%Chauncey DeVega: 4.3%Salon: 3.2%Appeal to Authority15.4%This article: 1.1%Chauncey DeVega: 3.0%Salon: 2.3%False Dilemma1.1%This article: 9.6%Chauncey DeVega: 3.8%Salon: 1.5%Slippery Slope9.6%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.4%Chauncey DeVega: 8.6%Salon: 10.7%Hasty Generalization8.4%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 1.0%Salon: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 11.8%Chauncey DeVega: 6.0%Salon: 5.9%Appeal to Emotion11.8%This article: 2.5%Chauncey DeVega: 2.2%Salon: 1.5%Begging the Question2.5%This article: 10.0%Chauncey DeVega: 2.4%Salon: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.6%Chauncey DeVega: 1.1%Salon: 0.5%Burden of Proof5.6%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.8%Salon: 0.6%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 3.6%Chauncey DeVega: 2.9%Salon: 2.7%Anecdotal3.6%This article: 2.2%Chauncey DeVega: 0.3%Salon: 0.1%No True Scotsman2.2%This article: 5.5%Chauncey DeVega: 1.8%Salon: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.5%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.8%Chauncey DeVega: 0.2%Salon: 0.1%Middle Ground1.8%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.0%Chauncey DeVega: 1.2%Salon: 2.0%Unattributed Quote3.0%This article: 9.5%Chauncey DeVega: 1.6%Salon: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection9.5%This article: 11.4%Chauncey DeVega: 17.6%Salon: 15.2%Biased Writer Voice11.4%This article: 13.0%Chauncey DeVega: 2.8%Salon: 2.6%Indoctrination13.0%This article: 25.0%Chauncey DeVega: 14.2%Salon: 6.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias25.0%This article: 0.0%Chauncey DeVega: 0.0%Salon: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Chauncey DeVega: 2.3%Salon: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.1%

1047 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers8.9%attributed speech954writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWinston Churchill • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWinston Churchill • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 100.0% coverageMichael Waldman • 28 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Waldman • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageDonald K. Sherman • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald K. Sherman

100%flagged-word coverage
20 attributed words22% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+89.6 ptsWriter: 10.4%Donald K. Sherman: 100.0%100.0%Politically Left Leaning B-27.5 ptsWriter: 27.5%Donald K. Sherman: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-14.3 ptsWriter: 14.3%Donald K. Sherman: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-8.5 ptsWriter: 8.5%Donald K. Sherman: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -4.5 ptsWriter: 4.5%Donald K. Sherman: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-2.3 ptsWriter: 2.3%Donald K. Sherman: 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.