MS NOW94%

‘There are two tracks’: Inside the White House’s struggle to keep Trump on message 47%

By Jake Traylor85%

5/28/2026, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Unattributed Quote, and Pessimism Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 47.8% saturation with 475 hits. Analysis detected 2,083 faulty-reasoning hits from 993 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.8% and a BS Rank of 47% (10,988 of 20,453 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 53.70% of the article peer group.

President Donald Trump’s job approval numbers on the economy have sunk to record lows. 
His aides know it. 
His former advisers are saying so publicly. 
And yet the president keeps talking about what he wants to talk about, not the issues voters say are driving their discontent  much to the White House’s chagrin. 
As the U.S. war with Iran stretches into its fourth month  driving up gas and grocery prices and stoking inflation  Trump has devoted time to other topics that make some of his own staff wince. 
There are his latest construction projects, including the new White House ballroom and the renovation of the reflecting pool on the National Mall. 
There’s the purge of Republican lawmakers deemed insufficiently loyal, most recently four-term Sen. 
John Cornyn of Texas. 
The SAVE America Act. 
The Abraham Accords. 
The $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” to pay out people who his Justice Department believes have been unjustly targeted by the government for partisan reasons  a group that potentially includes people convicted of violent crimes associated with the Capitol riot on Jan. 
6, 2021. 
The list goes on. 
In response, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles has given her staffers a simple directive: Stick to the affordability script and let Trump be Trump, according to a White House official granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal strategy. 
“There are two tracks: There is what the president says, and then there’s what you as a staff member message on,” said the White House official. 
Cabinet secretaries have attempted to fill the gap by including affordability messaging into their respective departments’ efforts, the official said. 
They pointed to recent moves by the Small Business Administration to reduce fraud in loan guarantees, and the Environmental Protection Agency’s quest to roll back certain grocery store refrigeration requirements. 
Both moves were sold publicly as moves to bring down costs. 
Polling suggests the two-track approach isn’t working. 
A recent New York Times/Siena survey found that just 38% of Americans approve of Trump’s performance, a record low during his second term. 
A Gallup poll found that confidence in the economy has hit an almost four-year low, with only 16% of respondents rating the economy as in “excellent” or “good” condition; 3 in 4 Americans said that economic conditions are worsening. 
When Trump has stayed on topic, he has tried to assure the public that prices will come down once the war with Iran ends  a “detour,” he has described it  and pointed to a record-high stock market. 
Those talking points are unlikely to prove effective with a restive public that believes the economy is in poor shape. 
One especially illustrative moment came during a visit to the ballroom construction site last week. 
Speaking to reporters against the backdrop, Trump dismissed rising gas prices as “peanuts” and said he appreciated “everybody putting up with it for a little while.” 
It was, former advisers say, a perfect encapsulation of the problem. 
One former adviser said Trump’s current advisers were “no longer effective” in either arming the president with sound advice or successfully persuading the president to follow their guidance. 
“While beautifying our nation’s capital is surely important and appreciated, if you don’t live, work, or visit D.C., you don’t really reap the benefits of the president’s passion projects,” said a former Trump White House official granted anonymity to speak candidly. 
“What people do feel is $4.50 gas, and that’s the real passion point for Americans.” 
“I think it’s a failure on the part of his staff,” the aforementioned former Trump adviser told MS NOW. 
“They’re not focused on the issues that Americans are focused on, which is obviously affordability.” 
The former adviser was particularly critical of the White House’s handling of the $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund and the ballroom construction project, as well as some of the Trump administration’s recent immigration policies and Trump’s efforts to purge incumbent Republicans in Congress, which the former adviser called “silly intraparty feuds” and a “misplaced priority.” 
“While obviously the president is going to do what the president is going to do, his staff has just so ill prepared him or ill informed him of the political consequences of what he’s doing,” the former adviser said. 
“It’s malpractice.” 
In response to a request for comment, White House communications director Steven Cheung disputed MS NOW’s reporting. 
“None of these low-level, unnamed sources actually know what’s actually going on. 
By peddling lies and falsehoods, they’re actually trying to hurt the country and the president’s agenda, in which they will fail,” Cheung said. 
“The directive has always been to tell the story of the president and his agenda, and highlight all the wonderful successes that have been achieved for the American people.” 
A summer of challenges ahead 
In the coming weeks, the White House will face its latest messaging challenge: an extravagant America’s 250th anniversary celebration  which the White House hopes will draw millions of Americans to Washington in celebration  as gas and travel prices remain stubbornly high. 
On June 14, which is also Trump’s birthday, the administration and the UFC are planning a sprawling celebration on the South Lawn of the White House as part of the nation’s 250th anniversary festivities, including a major fight card and a watch party at the adjacent Ellipse that could draw tens of thousands of people. 
The event is intended as a showcase of national pride. 
But travel analysts and airline executives are already warning of significant fare increases tied to rising fuel costs from the Iran conflict  a larger backdrop that could complicate the festive framing. 
Privately, some White House staffers have grown uneasy. 
But insiders say there is little appetite  or realistic path  toward a formal messaging reset. 
“There’s no new messaging approach. 
There can be no new approach. 
You can’t do that with [Trump],” a White House official said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.4%Jake Traylor: 3.8%MS NOW: 7.6%Confirmation Bias10.4%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.6%MS NOW: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.5%Jake Traylor: 1.7%MS NOW: 3.7%Availability Heuristic8.5%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.3%MS NOW: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.5%MS NOW: 1.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 1.7%MS NOW: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.5%Jake Traylor: 15.1%MS NOW: 15.5%Framing Effect17.5%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 1.1%MS NOW: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 2.2%MS NOW: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.9%Jake Traylor: 2.4%MS NOW: 2.4%Optimism Bias2.9%This article: 13.2%Jake Traylor: 2.9%MS NOW: 3.2%Pessimism Bias13.2%This article: 47.8%Jake Traylor: 18.6%MS NOW: 19.3%Negativity Bias47.8%This article: 3.1%Jake Traylor: 1.4%MS NOW: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias3.1%This article: 9.5%Jake Traylor: 2.9%MS NOW: 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error9.5%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 2.8%MS NOW: 3.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.8%MS NOW: 2.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 2.3%MS NOW: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 1.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 1.0%MS NOW: 1.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.2%Jake Traylor: 3.0%MS NOW: 4.8%Ad Hominem1.2%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 1.1%MS NOW: 1.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 12.3%Jake Traylor: 3.6%MS NOW: 5.4%Appeal to Authority12.3%This article: 6.0%Jake Traylor: 2.9%MS NOW: 2.2%False Dilemma6.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.8%MS NOW: 2.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 2.9%Jake Traylor: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.2%Circular Reasoning2.9%This article: 3.9%Jake Traylor: 4.4%MS NOW: 8.1%Hasty Generalization3.9%This article: 4.3%Jake Traylor: 0.7%MS NOW: 0.7%Red Herring4.3%This article: 2.0%Jake Traylor: 0.3%MS NOW: 0.9%Bandwagon2.0%This article: 9.4%Jake Traylor: 6.3%MS NOW: 9.9%Appeal to Emotion9.4%This article: 6.0%Jake Traylor: 1.6%MS NOW: 2.4%Begging the Question6.0%This article: 10.9%Jake Traylor: 3.9%MS NOW: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.9%This article: 2.3%Jake Traylor: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.6%Tu Quoque2.3%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 1.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.9%Jake Traylor: 0.3%MS NOW: 0.3%Composition/Division3.9%This article: 7.2%Jake Traylor: 2.6%MS NOW: 2.6%Anecdotal7.2%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.4%Jake Traylor: 1.3%MS NOW: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.4%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.4%MS NOW: 1.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 14.7%Jake Traylor: 8.1%MS NOW: 2.5%Unattributed Quote14.7%This article: 1.2%Jake Traylor: 2.5%MS NOW: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection1.2%This article: 0.2%Jake Traylor: 7.9%MS NOW: 14.2%Biased Writer Voice0.2%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.6%MS NOW: 2.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 1.9%MS NOW: 5.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.3%MS NOW: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Traylor: 0.1%MS NOW: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

993 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.2%attributed speech912writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 54 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageSteven Cheung • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSteven Cheung • 12 words • 100.0% coverageSteven Cheung • 23 words • 0.0% coverageSteven Cheung • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 55 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Steven Cheung

79%flagged-word coverage
81 attributed words100% of attributed speech87% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Unattributed Quote-16.0 ptsWriter: 16.0%Steven Cheung: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+14.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Steven Cheung: 14.8%14.8%Biased Writer Voice-0.2 ptsWriter: 0.2%Steven Cheung: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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