WBUR⁠9%

Battle over county elections in Arizona echoes 2020 showdown ⁠66%

By Here⁠38% Now Newsroom⁠38%

7/10/2026, 12:01:31 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 6 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Hindsight Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 48.1% saturation with 39 hits. Analysis detected 191 faulty-reasoning hits from 81 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 59.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠66% (7,631 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 65.10% of the article peer group.

Early voting is underway in Arizona for the July 21 primary election. 
But a fight between Maricopa County officials brings back memories of the 2020 presidential election, when President Trump and his allies falsely claimed that Trump had won the battleground state. 
Here & Now's Peter O'Dowd meets up with KJZZ’s Wayne Schutsky at the county courthouse for the latest on an ongoing legal battle. 
This segment aired on July 10, 2026. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Here: 1.6%Cognoscenti: 2.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 48.1%Here: 7.9%Cognoscenti: 2.3%Availability Heuristic48.1%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 37.0%Here: 1.7%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Hindsight Bias37.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 48.1%Here: 29.1%Cognoscenti: 3.9%Framing Effect48.1%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 3.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 37.0%Here: 20.5%Cognoscenti: 5.0%Negativity Bias37.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 2.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 14.0%Cognoscenti: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 28.4%Here: 1.5%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Primacy Effect28.4%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 5.6%Cognoscenti: 2.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 3.4%Cognoscenti: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.7%Cognoscenti: 3.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 3.4%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 5.4%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 3.4%Cognoscenti: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 3.1%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 2.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 2.0%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.7%Cognoscenti: 0.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 37.0%Here: 23.6%Cognoscenti: 3.0%Biased Writer Voice37.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 4.8%Cognoscenti: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Here: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

81 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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