BS Summary: This article contains 13 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Pessimism Bias, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 14.5% saturation with 53 hits. Analysis detected 316 faulty-reasoning hits from 366 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 30.8% and a BS Rank of 15% (18,199 of 21,180 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 85.90% of the article peer group.

Rep. 
Nancy Mace (R-SC) said her split with President Donald Trump may mean the end of her political career, especially after she said she “got my butt beat” running for governor. 
Mace was one of a handful of House Republicans last year to sign a discharge petition to force a vote on legislation that would compel the Department of Justice to release all of its files  unredacted except for victims’ names  on deceased sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein . 
The House passed the bill, as did the Senate. 
Trump signed the bill into law, even though he could have unilaterally released the files without Congress. 
In May, Trump snubbed Mace in South Carolina’s gubernatorial campaign by endorsing Lt. 
Governor Pamela Evette . 
The next month, Mace finished the Republican primary in fifth place . 
Mace, who is leaving Congress at the end of her term in January, appeared on NewsNation on Monday night, where Chris Cuomo asked if she will run in the special election to replace former Sen. 
Lindsey Graham (R), who died on Saturday, on the ballot. 
On Monday, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster (R) appointed Graham’s sister, Darline Graham Nordone (R), to finish out the term, which expires in January. 
An Aug. 11 special election will determine which Republican will face off against Democratic nominee Annie Andrews, a physician. 
“Will you run in the special election?” 
Cuomo asked. 
Mace dodged the question, stating, “My focus right now is focusing on South Carolina.” 
Cuomo then pivoted to her “righteous break” with Trump over the Epstein files, but noted that it could prove pivotal should she decide to run for Senate. 
“But could that be enough to ruin your chances?” 
he asked. 
“It may have ended my political career, Chris,” Mace replied. 
“You said it,” the host responded. 
Mace said she enjoys “calling out Democrats and Republicans alike,” though she added, “I got my butt beat in the governor’s race, ok? 
So, you know, those are all things that you sort of weigh.” 
Watch above via NewsNation. 
The post Nancy Mace Says Trump ‘May Have Ended My Political Career’ first appeared on Mediaite . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 5.0%Mediaite: 5.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.9%Mediaite: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 2.7%Mediaite: 3.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.9%Mediaite: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.7%Mediaite: 2.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.1%Michael Luciano: 7.3%Mediaite: 9.1%Framing Effect10.1%This article: 10.9%Michael Luciano: 0.3%Mediaite: 0.4%Loss Aversion10.9%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.5%Mediaite: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.5%Mediaite: 1.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 10.9%Michael Luciano: 2.0%Mediaite: 1.6%Pessimism Bias10.9%This article: 14.5%Michael Luciano: 15.7%Mediaite: 14.6%Negativity Bias14.5%This article: 6.3%Michael Luciano: 1.4%Mediaite: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias6.3%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.9%Mediaite: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.3%Mediaite: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.1%Mediaite: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 2.4%Mediaite: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.9%Mediaite: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.3%Mediaite: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.3%Michael Luciano: 1.6%Mediaite: 2.3%Recency Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.5%Mediaite: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 3.3%Mediaite: 3.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.9%Mediaite: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 4.3%Mediaite: 3.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 2.5%Michael Luciano: 2.4%Mediaite: 2.4%False Dilemma2.5%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.6%Mediaite: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 6.2%Mediaite: 7.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.6%Mediaite: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.4%Mediaite: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 4.3%Mediaite: 6.7%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.8%Mediaite: 1.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 8.2%Michael Luciano: 3.6%Mediaite: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.2%This article: 1.6%Michael Luciano: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Tu Quoque1.6%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.4%Mediaite: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.3%Michael Luciano: 5.4%Mediaite: 2.8%Anecdotal6.3%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.2%Mediaite: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.9%Michael Luciano: 2.8%Mediaite: 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.9%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.3%Mediaite: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.3%Mediaite: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.3%Mediaite: 3.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.7%Michael Luciano: 2.5%Mediaite: 3.2%Quote-first Misdirection2.7%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 6.9%Mediaite: 8.3%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 2.0%Mediaite: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 2.3%Mediaite: 2.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Luciano: 1.5%Mediaite: 1.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Michael Luciano: 2.5%Mediaite: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.1%

366 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers45%attributed speech203writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageNancy Mace • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageChris Cuomo • 7 words • 0.0% coverageChris Cuomo • 2 words • 0.0% coverageNancy Mace • 14 words • 0.0% coverageChris Cuomo • 27 words • 0.0% coverageChris Cuomo • 9 words • 0.0% coverageChris Cuomo • 2 words • 0.0% coverageNancy Mace • 10 words • 0.0% coverageChris Cuomo • 6 words • 0.0% coverageNancy Mace • 23 words • 0.0% coverageNancy Mace • 12 words • 0.0% coverageNewsNation • 4 words • 100.0% coverageMediaite • 17 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Nancy Mace

84%flagged-word coverage
89 attributed words55% of attributed speech26% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Quote-first Misdirection-4.9 ptsWriter: 4.9%Nancy Mace: 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.