KQED61%

Steve Hilton Edges Out Tom Steyer for Second Spot in California Governor Election 36%

By Guy Marzorati71%

6/9/2026, 11:52:37 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Pessimism Bias, and False Dilemma, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 18.6% saturation with 101 hits. Analysis detected 1,053 faulty-reasoning hits from 542 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 42.9% and a BS Rank of 36% (13,701 of 21,174 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 64.70% of the article peer group.

Republican Steve Hilton claimed the second spot in California’s primary for governor on Tuesday, edging out Democrat Tom Steyer. 
Hilton will face former U.S Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, in the general election. 
Hilton, a former political adviser in the United Kingdom and Fox News host, was able to consolidate Republican voters after winning an endorsement from President Donald Trump. 
But his path to victory in November promises to be an uphill climb: No Republican has been elected governor of California since 2006. 
“What an incredible honor to be chosen by Californians to lead the movement for change in the greatest state in the greatest nation on earth,” Hilton said in a statement. 
“I can’t wait to get started on the most high-energy campaign this state has ever seen.” 
California Republicans voted early at higher rates than in the state’s last primary for governor in 2022. 
Many reliable Democratic voters cast their ballots later than usual, perhaps due to the tight contest for governor. 
As a result, the vote-by-mail ballots cast on Election Day trended more Democratic than early votes, increasing Becerra and Steyer’s vote share and decreasing Hilton’s share in recent counts. 
But even with millions of ballots left to count, Steyer’s path remained narrow  he needed to lead Hilton by overwhelming margins in the updates coming from deep blue Los Angeles and the Bay Area. 
The Associated Press made its call on Tuesday when Steyer no longer had a path to victory. 
The Democratic investor spent a record $216 million of his own fortune on the campaign. 
He racked up endorsements from progressive leaders and unions, including the powerful California Teachers Association, and laid out a platform that relied heavily on expanding state programs through new taxes on corporations. 
But his career as a hedge fund manager, which included investments in fossil fuel companies and private prisons, may have turned off Democrats wary of billionaire power. 
These vulnerabilities were amplified by over $36 million in outside spending by business groups against Steyer, led by utility PG&E. 
Steyer had proposed to appoint regulators who would lower utility profits. 
“This campaign proved that business-as-usual depends on politics-as-usual, and there is no going back,” Steyer said in a statement. 
“We must continue to fight for a system where democracy serves Californians, not corporations  and where you do not have to be a billionaire to run on single-payer, or on breaking up monopolies, or on calling out a corrupt system when you see it.” 
Hilton began to separate from the other leading Republican in the race, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, after Trump’s endorsement. 
A pre-election survey from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies found 37% of likely Republican voters said the endorsement made them more likely to back Hilton, compared to just 6% who said it made them less likely to support him. 
But the Trump endorsement that was a propellant in the primary could prove to be an anchor for Hilton in the general election. 
That same Berkeley IGS survey found 57% of likely voters believe “fighting Trump administration policies” is a very important issue in considering who to support for governor. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.6%Guy Marzorati: 1.5%CalMatters: 1.9%Confirmation Bias14.6%This article: 3.7%Guy Marzorati: 1.0%CalMatters: 0.9%Anchoring Bias3.7%This article: 8.3%Guy Marzorati: 1.9%CalMatters: 3.0%Availability Heuristic8.3%This article: 9.2%Guy Marzorati: 1.1%CalMatters: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic9.2%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.5%CalMatters: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 1.3%CalMatters: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 18.6%Guy Marzorati: 6.9%CalMatters: 6.3%Framing Effect18.6%This article: 8.3%Guy Marzorati: 1.4%CalMatters: 1.0%Loss Aversion8.3%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.8%CalMatters: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.0%Guy Marzorati: 3.5%CalMatters: 3.5%Optimism Bias3.0%This article: 14.9%Guy Marzorati: 1.1%CalMatters: 1.4%Pessimism Bias14.9%This article: 13.7%Guy Marzorati: 5.0%CalMatters: 6.4%Negativity Bias13.7%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 1.0%CalMatters: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 13.3%Guy Marzorati: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error13.3%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 1.0%CalMatters: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.5%Guy Marzorati: 1.3%CalMatters: 2.7%Halo Effect5.5%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.1%Guy Marzorati: 1.1%CalMatters: 0.9%Recency Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.5%CalMatters: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.6%CalMatters: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.0%Guy Marzorati: 3.1%CalMatters: 3.1%Appeal to Authority5.0%This article: 14.8%Guy Marzorati: 1.6%CalMatters: 1.1%False Dilemma14.8%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.6%CalMatters: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.0%Guy Marzorati: 2.6%CalMatters: 3.6%Hasty Generalization5.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.5%CalMatters: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 16.8%Guy Marzorati: 3.5%CalMatters: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion16.8%This article: 3.5%Guy Marzorati: 0.6%CalMatters: 0.6%Begging the Question3.5%This article: 14.0%Guy Marzorati: 1.6%CalMatters: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.8%CalMatters: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.2%Guy Marzorati: 1.0%CalMatters: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.2%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.7%CalMatters: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.5%Guy Marzorati: 3.4%CalMatters: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice3.5%This article: 8.3%Guy Marzorati: 6.3%CalMatters: 1.9%Indoctrination8.3%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 1.6%CalMatters: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Guy Marzorati: 2.4%CalMatters: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

542 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers20%attributed speech432writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageSteve Hilton • 30 words • 0.0% coverageSteve Hilton • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageTom Steyer • 19 words • 100.0% coverageTom Steyer • 45 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Tom Steyer

100%flagged-word coverage
64 attributed words58% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%37.5%75.0%Indoctrination+70.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tom Steyer: 70.3%70.3%Biased Writer Voice+29.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tom Steyer: 29.7%29.7%

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.