BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Pessimism Bias, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.7% saturation with 85 hits. Analysis detected 729 faulty-reasoning hits from 392 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 67.3% and a BS Rank of 75% (5,206 of 20,557 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 74.70% of the article peer group.

The death of Sen. 
Lindsey Graham has left Senate Republicans scrambling to untangle a mess that the late South Carolina Republican had been wrestling with as the chair of the Senate Budget Committee. 
According to a report from Politico, it will be up to his replacement, Sen. 
Ron Johnson (R-WI) , to jump "directly into a legislative train wreck" with a highly contested spending bill looming. 
Johnson is inheriting a "political minefield," the report stated. 
The fiscal conservative earned his reputation by challenging his own party's spending appetites, but now he's forced to balance those convictions against the demands of leadership desperate to pass controversial legislation before the midterms arrive. 
"I wish Lindsey were alive ," Johnson acknowledged during an interview. 
"This is not the way you want to become chairman of the Budget. 
But set that aside  you know, this is a role that I think I'm pretty well suited for." 
The reality he faces is far messier than his initial optimism suggests, the report noted. 
Senate Republicans are battling over how to advance a reconciliation bill that would fund the Iran conflict and enact portions of Trump's SAVE America Act. 
The competing factions have fundamentally irreconcilable priorities. 
Fiscal conservatives demand spending offsets. 
Defense hawks insist on military funding increases. 
Agricultural interests want enhanced farm supports. 
And House Republicans are pushing to adopt a budget blueprint this week—before the committee has resolved these conflicts. 
According to Politico, "The soon-to-be Budget chair is instead having to reconcile his penchant for being a squeaky wheel from the sidelines with his new responsibility to help craft an agreement that leadership can then sell to skeptical colleagues as the midterms rapidly approach." 
"It's not going to be easy," Johnson admitted. 
"My initial effort is going to be, try and get everybody on the same page. 
I was in the private sector for 30-some years, and I sold plastics, so my main skill set is, I'm a salesman. 
That's what you've got to do, so  you have to convince people." 
Johnson is acutely aware of what happens when committee chairs resist leadership pressure. 
Sen. 
Rand Paul (R-KY), who chairs the Homeland Security Committee, was systematically excluded from border security negotiations on last year's reconciliation bill after he resisted spending targets that leadership demanded. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.8%Tom Boggioni: 4.8%Rawstory: 7.6%Confirmation Bias1.8%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.4%Rawstory: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Tom Boggioni: 6.8%Rawstory: 4.4%Availability Heuristic4.8%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.8%Tom Boggioni: 0.3%Rawstory: 1.0%Hindsight Bias3.8%This article: 3.3%Tom Boggioni: 0.7%Rawstory: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias3.3%This article: 21.2%Tom Boggioni: 20.8%Rawstory: 13.7%Framing Effect21.2%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.1%Rawstory: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%Tom Boggioni: 0.7%Rawstory: 0.7%Optimism Bias4.8%This article: 18.1%Tom Boggioni: 5.4%Rawstory: 2.8%Pessimism Bias18.1%This article: 21.7%Tom Boggioni: 28.2%Rawstory: 21.8%Negativity Bias21.7%This article: 10.5%Tom Boggioni: 0.4%Rawstory: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias10.5%This article: 10.7%Tom Boggioni: 3.9%Rawstory: 2.9%Fundamental Attribution Error10.7%This article: 8.9%Tom Boggioni: 0.6%Rawstory: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias8.9%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.2%Rawstory: 2.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.2%Rawstory: 1.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.7%Rawstory: 0.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.2%Rawstory: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.2%Rawstory: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.6%Tom Boggioni: 1.9%Rawstory: 1.7%Recency Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.6%Rawstory: 0.7%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.3%Rawstory: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 2.3%Rawstory: 6.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.2%Tom Boggioni: 4.8%Rawstory: 3.8%Appeal to Authority9.2%This article: 10.7%Tom Boggioni: 1.8%Rawstory: 2.9%False Dilemma10.7%This article: 4.8%Tom Boggioni: 1.7%Rawstory: 1.2%Slippery Slope4.8%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.9%Tom Boggioni: 10.5%Rawstory: 11.9%Hasty Generalization7.9%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.1%Rawstory: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.4%Tom Boggioni: 8.5%Rawstory: 9.2%Appeal to Emotion6.4%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.2%Rawstory: 1.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 7.4%Tom Boggioni: 2.4%Rawstory: 3.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.4%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 1.0%Rawstory: 1.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 4.8%Rawstory: 3.9%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.0%Tom Boggioni: 3.9%Rawstory: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.4%Rawstory: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 5.4%Rawstory: 5.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 11.2%Tom Boggioni: 4.1%Rawstory: 4.2%Quote-first Misdirection11.2%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 19.7%Rawstory: 15.6%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.7%Rawstory: 3.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 4.1%Rawstory: 8.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.9%Rawstory: 1.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tom Boggioni: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

392 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker26%attributed speech291writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageRon Johnson • 11 words • 0.0% coverageRon Johnson • 13 words • 0.0% coverageRon Johnson • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 100.0% coverageRon Johnson • 8 words • 0.0% coverageRon Johnson • 15 words • 0.0% coverageRon Johnson • 22 words • 0.0% coverageRon Johnson • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Ron Johnson

85%flagged-word coverage
101 attributed words100% of attributed speech92% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Quote-first Misdirection-15.1 ptsWriter: 15.1%Ron Johnson: 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.