Seething Republicans unload on Trump as he snubs the economy and fuels midterm panic: 'We're begging' 93%

By Jon Michael Raasch0%

6/12/2026, 4:27:41 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Biased Writer Voice, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 68% saturation with 369 hits. Analysis detected 2,542 faulty-reasoning hits from 543 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 87% and a BS Rank of 93% (1,738 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 92.10% of the article peer group.

Republicans on Capitol Hill are seething that Donald Trump is not more focused on the economy as this year's midterm elections approach, warning it could obliterate the narrow GOP congressional majority. 
Polling indicates that voters are souring on Trump and his Republican allies in Congress ahead of his November's elections that will prove fateful for the President's agenda. 
In addition to the lack of attention to fixing the economy, senior aides also identified the nomination of Federal Housing Finance Director Bill Pulte, a close ally of the President, to lead the Office of the Director of National Intelligence as an unforced error, as well as the focus on the anti-weaponization fund. 
A record 63 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy, according to a new Economist/YouGov survey released this week. 
Nearly six in ten say that the economy is getting worse. 
The Iran war has caused oil prices and everyday goods to spike while the consumer price index showed this week that inflation has climbed to 4.2 percent, the highest level in three years. 
'I love the inflation,' Trump flippantly said in the Oval Office this week when pressed on whether he's concerned about Americans facing higher costs. 
Behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, Trump's disregard for the turbulent economy - and focus on niche personal issues - has infuriated some working to sell his MAGA agenda. 
'People are pissed the f*** off that prices are too high and things are too expensive,' a senior GOP Senate aide told the Daily Mail. 
'It doesn't seem like there's a lot of focus on affordability going into the midterms when that's the number one issue that people care about  how can they afford gas, groceries and healthcare.' 
The aide continued: 'I'm just not sure the President really cares, or if he's really in tune with what's going on on Capitol Hill.' 
Trump's controversial selection of Pulte came the same week Republicans and Democrats on the Hill were locked in tough negotiations over the reauthorization of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). 
'Why would he announce a controversial figure for acting DNI when you know we're trying to push FISA over the finish line?' 
the senior aide questioned. 
While Trump has focused on setting up an Ultimate Fighting Championship match at the White House on his birthday, securing funding for his White House ballroom and an 'anti-weaponization' fund for his allies, incumbents feel left in the lurch. 
'Between the Pulte nominations and anti-weaponization fund, the White House has definitely gone rogue and instead pushed priorities without talking to Congressional leadership, particularly Leader [John] Thune,' a second senior GOP aide told the Daily Mail. 
'We’re begging the White House to focus on issues to help Republicans in the midterms, but it feels like it’s falling on deaf ears.' 
Trump has also attacked some incumbent GOP Senators he deemed as not loyal enough, resulting in their ousters. 
This has rocked the caucus and has now given some sitting Senators reason to buck Trump's agenda. 
'If our coalition falls apart, we will not be able to advance the President’s priorities,' a fourth Senate GOP aide shared. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 30.8%Jon Michael Raasch: 4.5%Daily Mail: 2.7%Confirmation Bias30.8%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.5%Daily Mail: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.7%Jon Michael Raasch: 5.5%Daily Mail: 2.8%Availability Heuristic7.7%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.1%Daily Mail: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 10.6%Daily Mail: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 27.3%Jon Michael Raasch: 20.1%Daily Mail: 6.9%Framing Effect27.3%This article: 4.4%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.4%Daily Mail: 0.4%Loss Aversion4.4%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 4.4%Daily Mail: 2.1%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 17.9%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.2%Daily Mail: 1.1%Pessimism Bias17.9%This article: 68.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 14.3%Daily Mail: 10.9%Negativity Bias68.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 3.7%Daily Mail: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 17.5%Jon Michael Raasch: 2.0%Daily Mail: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error17.5%This article: 12.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.3%Daily Mail: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias12.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 2.8%Daily Mail: 1.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.0%Daily Mail: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.6%Daily Mail: 5.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.6%Daily Mail: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.1%Daily Mail: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 20.6%Jon Michael Raasch: 2.5%Daily Mail: 1.7%Recency Bias20.6%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.3%Daily Mail: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.4%Daily Mail: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 3.1%Daily Mail: 1.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.6%Jon Michael Raasch: 4.1%Daily Mail: 3.0%Appeal to Authority6.6%This article: 15.1%Jon Michael Raasch: 3.4%Daily Mail: 0.9%False Dilemma15.1%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 3.2%Daily Mail: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 19.9%Jon Michael Raasch: 10.2%Daily Mail: 3.9%Hasty Generalization19.9%This article: 16.9%Jon Michael Raasch: 2.5%Daily Mail: 0.4%Red Herring16.9%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.5%Daily Mail: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 23.8%Jon Michael Raasch: 11.0%Daily Mail: 6.5%Appeal to Emotion23.8%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.2%Daily Mail: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 18.6%Jon Michael Raasch: 7.2%Daily Mail: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)18.6%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.5%Daily Mail: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 8.3%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.0%Daily Mail: 0.4%Burden of Proof8.3%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 33.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 8.0%Daily Mail: 3.1%Anecdotal33.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.7%Jon Michael Raasch: 5.1%Daily Mail: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.7%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.4%Daily Mail: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 6.3%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.5%Daily Mail: 0.1%Personal Incredulity6.3%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.4%Daily Mail: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.4%Daily Mail: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 44.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 7.5%Daily Mail: 3.3%Unattributed Quote44.0%This article: 15.7%Jon Michael Raasch: 3.2%Daily Mail: 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection15.7%This article: 40.5%Jon Michael Raasch: 7.9%Daily Mail: 8.9%Biased Writer Voice40.5%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 0.0%Daily Mail: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.5%Daily Mail: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.0%Daily Mail: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias5.7%This article: 0.0%Jon Michael Raasch: 1.8%Daily Mail: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

543 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker4.4%attributed speech519writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 53 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
24 attributed words100% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+88.2 ptsWriter: 11.8%Trump: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+62.2 ptsWriter: 37.8%Trump: 100.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote-46.1 ptsWriter: 46.1%Trump: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -6.0 ptsWriter: 6.0%Trump: 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.