Calif. county discovers hundreds of uncounted ballots from 2025 state redistricting election 34%

By Addie Davis0%

5/7/2026, 4:28:45 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Optimism Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 19.4% saturation with 91 hits. Analysis detected 703 faulty-reasoning hits from 470 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 42.1% and a BS Rank of 34% (14,488 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 66.20% of the article peer group.

An official mail-in ballot drop box is posted outside of a library ahead of Election Day on October 5, 2020 in Los Angeles, California. 
(Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images) 
OAN Staff Addie Davis 
4:28 PM  Thursday, May 7, 2026 
The Humboldt County Office of Elections announced that staff found 596 uncounted ballots from the November 4, 2025, redistricting special election in California, according to a press release. 
Staff discovered the sealed ballots in a locked drop box on Monday, and the office confirmed they had not been tampered with. 
There was reportedly a miscommunication at the time about whether or not the box had been fully emptied. 
The office said it is working in tandem with the California Secretary of State to determine next steps, stating it will “explore every available option to get these votes counted.” 
Both the state and the office confirmed that counting the ballots would not change the result of the November 4th election, per the release. 
Humboldt County Clerk-Recorder and Registrar of Voters Juan Pablo Cervantes said an election worker had not followed proper procedures, but he ultimately took the responsibility. 
“This discovery highlights why strong systems, redundancy and clear accountability must be in place at every step in the election process. 
In this case, those safeguards were not sufficient. 
That responsibility is mine and I am deeply sorry,” Cervantes said. 
He and the office stated that a new procedure has been put in place to ensure the error does not occur again. 
According to data provided by the state, 47,540 people voted in the special election in Humboldt County, which means the missing ballots make up just over 1% of the total votes in the county. 
“We ask a lot of voters. 
We ask you to participate, to trust the process and to believe that your vote will be counted. 596 voters did exactly what we asked of them, and we fell short,” Cervantes said. 
“We will be pursuing all legal avenues to get your ballots counted,” he added. 
The office noted that according to the state’s elections code, all ballots from the special election must be destroyed six months after it was certified. 
Proposition 50, passed by Golden State voters in the November 4th special election, was a mid-decade redistricting measure that would allow the state to redraw congressional district maps, which are expected to give Democrats a net gain of seats in the House. 
The measure claimed it was in response to Texas’ new congressional maps, which gave Republicans an extra five seats before the 2026 midterms. 
Unlike in the Lone Star State, California required a vote from the population to pass the proposition. 
Stay informed! 
Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. 
Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 4.4%One America News Network: 4.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 7.2%Addie Davis: 1.2%One America News Network: 2.4%Anchoring Bias7.2%This article: 2.1%Addie Davis: 2.2%One America News Network: 3.9%Availability Heuristic2.1%This article: 8.9%Addie Davis: 0.6%One America News Network: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic8.9%This article: 1.7%Addie Davis: 0.2%One America News Network: 0.9%Hindsight Bias1.7%This article: 4.7%Addie Davis: 3.6%One America News Network: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias4.7%This article: 4.9%Addie Davis: 9.3%One America News Network: 15.3%Framing Effect4.9%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.6%One America News Network: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.4%One America News Network: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 14.0%Addie Davis: 3.9%One America News Network: 4.3%Optimism Bias14.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 1.2%One America News Network: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 11.9%Addie Davis: 8.4%One America News Network: 11.8%Negativity Bias11.9%This article: 7.7%Addie Davis: 5.3%One America News Network: 3.2%Self-Serving Bias7.7%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 1.4%One America News Network: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.3%One America News Network: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 4.0%One America News Network: 3.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 3.0%One America News Network: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 3.1%One America News Network: 5.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.2%One America News Network: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 1.3%One America News Network: 2.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.7%One America News Network: 0.7%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 5.6%One America News Network: 2.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.8%One America News Network: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 19.4%Addie Davis: 4.0%One America News Network: 6.3%Appeal to Authority19.4%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 1.8%One America News Network: 1.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.9%One America News Network: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.1%One America News Network: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.2%Addie Davis: 5.9%One America News Network: 5.4%Hasty Generalization7.2%This article: 3.6%Addie Davis: 0.5%One America News Network: 0.5%Red Herring3.6%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.3%One America News Network: 1.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 7.0%Addie Davis: 10.5%One America News Network: 10.0%Appeal to Emotion7.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 2.0%One America News Network: 1.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 4.9%Addie Davis: 2.8%One America News Network: 3.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.9%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.1%One America News Network: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.4%One America News Network: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.1%One America News Network: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 1.6%One America News Network: 1.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.2%One America News Network: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.7%Addie Davis: 1.0%One America News Network: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.7%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.2%One America News Network: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.2%One America News Network: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 0.4%One America News Network: 0.7%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 18.9%Addie Davis: 2.3%One America News Network: 1.7%Unattributed Quote18.9%This article: 4.5%Addie Davis: 2.5%One America News Network: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection4.5%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 5.7%One America News Network: 5.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 7.0%Addie Davis: 2.3%One America News Network: 1.1%Indoctrination7.0%This article: 8.9%Addie Davis: 0.4%One America News Network: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias8.9%This article: 0.0%Addie Davis: 5.9%One America News Network: 3.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.2%Addie Davis: 1.8%One America News Network: 1.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.2%

470 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers57%attributed speech201writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageHumboldt County Office of Elections • 28 words • 0.0% coverageHumboldt County Office of Elections • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageCalifornia Secretary of State • 30 words • 0.0% coverageHumboldt County Office of Elections • 24 words • 100.0% coverageJuan Pablo Cervantes • 25 words • 0.0% coverageJuan Pablo Cervantes • 21 words • 100.0% coverageJuan Pablo Cervantes • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJuan Pablo Cervantes • 11 words • 0.0% coverageHumboldt County Office of Elections • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageJuan Pablo Cervantes • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJuan Pablo Cervantes • 33 words • 100.0% coverageJuan Pablo Cervantes • 14 words • 0.0% coverageHumboldt County Office of Elections • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Juan Pablo Cervantes

95%flagged-word coverage
118 attributed words44% of attributed speech71% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Unattributed Quote-32.3 ptsWriter: 32.3%Juan Pablo Cervantes: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+28.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Juan Pablo Cervantes: 28.0%28.0%Politically Left Leaning B-20.9 ptsWriter: 20.9%Juan Pablo Cervantes: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+17.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Juan Pablo Cervantes: 17.8%17.8%Attempt to Sell a Product -7.5 ptsWriter: 7.5%Juan Pablo Cervantes: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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