The Blaze79%

Latino voters want the SAVE Act 97%

By Joseph Castleberry0%

7/18/2026, 7:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Biased Writer Voice, and In-Group Bias, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 44.2% saturation with 294 hits. Analysis detected 2,347 faulty-reasoning hits from 665 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 95.1% and a BS Rank of 97% (708 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 96.80% of the article peer group.

Latino voters overwhelmingly support requiring government-issued photo ID to vote. 
A Poll conducted by Pew Research Center confirmed that 82% of Latino voters in the United States approve such a requirement. 
The SAVE Act would codify the popular supermajority opinion on voter identification into law, but while the House has passed it multiple times, it has stalled in the Senate. 
As citizens, Latinos want to protect the democratic republic that has blessed their lives so richly. 
It should be no surprise that Latino voters support the key feature of the SAVE Act. 
First, immigrant voters highly value their citizenship and the right to vote that it conveys to them. 
It takes at least seven years of legal presence in the U.S. to become a citizen, and those who have gone through that process value what they learned and who they became in the process. 
They are proud and patriotic and zealous to preserve the system they have adopted and mastered. 
They do not take their rights as citizens lightly, and they do not want noncitizens to vote. 
Second, immigrant voters highly value the rule of law, which they recognize as the main thing that makes the United States what it is  the best place in the world to work and build a prosperous and free life. 
While writing my book,  The New Pilgrims: How Immigrants are Renewing America’s Faith and Values ,” I interviewed many immigrants who specifically explained that they moved to America for the purpose of coming under the rule of law. 
They understand that no justice, no equal protection under law, is possible without it. 
They can also articulate how lawlessness and cheating undermine prosperity in their home countries. 
They understand that the land of the free and home of the brave persists because of America’s deep cultural commitment to obeying the law. 
They understand how illegal voting would undermine the very thing they value most about life in America. 
Third, Latino immigrants, whether they are here legally or illegally, do not want noncitizens to vote in our elections. 
While the vast majority of illegal immigrants in America lead disciplined lives characterized by arduous labor, careful observance of the law, and moral practices such as church attendance, Latino immigrants recognize that there is a criminal element among many new immigrants that they do not want to empower in the United States. 
Many of the most vulnerable illegal immigrants fled to the United States to get away from such people in their countries of origin. 
They do not want to risk arrest, imprisonment, or deportation by voting illegally, and they certainly do not want the criminal element to do so. 
Hispanic immigrants in the United States who have become citizens have a terrific record of success in building the American dream of prosperity and freedom. 
Many current U.S. government officials and members of Congress illustrate spectacular success stories of immigrants and children of immigrants from Latin America: Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), and Maria Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.), not to mention Sonia Sotomayor, Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Luz Rivas (D-Calif.), and many others on both sides of the aisle. 
Stories from industry, business, education, the military, the clergy, and every institution and profession in our society offer a literally never-ending story of Latino success in America. 
The system works beautifully for those who pay the price to become citizens and raise their children to love our country. 
Latino voters are not a monolith. 
They voted for the Republican and Democrat presidential candidates in nearly equal numbers in 2024. 
In future elections, they will vote for the candidates that best represent their values and support them in Congress. 
It’s time for both Democrat and Republican senators to represent the overwhelming Latino opinion and vote to pass the SAVE Act now, while there is still time to rescue America’s political integrity. 
Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.8%Joseph Castleberry: 6.0%Blaze Media: 5.6%Confirmation Bias9.8%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 1.1%Blaze Media: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 19.7%Joseph Castleberry: 8.5%Blaze Media: 3.2%Availability Heuristic19.7%This article: 9.3%Joseph Castleberry: 3.1%Blaze Media: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic9.3%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.4%Joseph Castleberry: 5.2%Blaze Media: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias7.4%This article: 9.2%Joseph Castleberry: 6.1%Blaze Media: 9.6%Framing Effect9.2%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 1.6%Blaze Media: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.2%Joseph Castleberry: 2.1%Blaze Media: 0.5%Status Quo Bias3.2%This article: 4.4%Joseph Castleberry: 1.5%Blaze Media: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect4.4%This article: 6.9%Joseph Castleberry: 7.1%Blaze Media: 1.7%Optimism Bias6.9%This article: 3.6%Joseph Castleberry: 1.2%Blaze Media: 1.6%Pessimism Bias3.6%This article: 18.9%Joseph Castleberry: 6.3%Blaze Media: 9.8%Negativity Bias18.9%This article: 5.3%Joseph Castleberry: 1.8%Blaze Media: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 24.8%Joseph Castleberry: 11.7%Blaze Media: 2.7%In-Group Bias24.8%This article: 2.9%Joseph Castleberry: 8.0%Blaze Media: 1.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.9%This article: 18.2%Joseph Castleberry: 20.2%Blaze Media: 2.6%Halo Effect18.2%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.3%Joseph Castleberry: 1.5%Blaze Media: 1.1%Recency Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.2%Joseph Castleberry: 3.2%Blaze Media: 3.7%Appeal to Authority3.2%This article: 7.7%Joseph Castleberry: 6.8%Blaze Media: 2.4%False Dilemma7.7%This article: 2.6%Joseph Castleberry: 1.7%Blaze Media: 1.5%Slippery Slope2.6%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 44.2%Joseph Castleberry: 59.8%Blaze Media: 8.9%Hasty Generalization44.2%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 9.2%Joseph Castleberry: 6.9%Blaze Media: 0.9%Bandwagon9.2%This article: 22.6%Joseph Castleberry: 16.6%Blaze Media: 8.2%Appeal to Emotion22.6%This article: 7.7%Joseph Castleberry: 4.2%Blaze Media: 1.5%Begging the Question7.7%This article: 7.4%Joseph Castleberry: 2.5%Blaze Media: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.4%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 1.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 10.2%Joseph Castleberry: 3.4%Blaze Media: 0.3%Composition/Division10.2%This article: 35.3%Joseph Castleberry: 18.4%Blaze Media: 2.6%Anecdotal35.3%This article: 5.3%Joseph Castleberry: 1.8%Blaze Media: 0.2%No True Scotsman5.3%This article: 7.8%Joseph Castleberry: 2.6%Blaze Media: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.8%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 2.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 3.2%Joseph Castleberry: 1.1%Blaze Media: 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection3.2%This article: 26.5%Joseph Castleberry: 15.1%Blaze Media: 10.6%Biased Writer Voice26.5%This article: 9.8%Joseph Castleberry: 7.3%Blaze Media: 4.5%Indoctrination9.8%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joseph Castleberry: 4.7%Blaze Media: 7.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Joseph Castleberry: 1.6%Blaze Media: 2.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.8%

665 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers5.4%attributed speech629writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coveragePew Research Center • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 52 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 55 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageRealClearPolitics • 15 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Pew Research Center

100%flagged-word coverage
21 attributed words58% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Pew Research Center: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-28.0 ptsWriter: 28.0%Pew Research Center: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-10.3 ptsWriter: 10.3%Pew Research Center: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.1 ptsWriter: 5.1%Pew Research Center: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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