RedState91%

Dems Crash Out Over Platner, As They Scramble Away From Him and Calls to Step Aside Begin 91%

By Nick Arama94%

7/6/2026, 6:15:25 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 35 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Hasty Generalization, and Unattributed Quote, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 58.9% saturation with 339 hits. Analysis detected 2,270 faulty-reasoning hits from 576 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 84.9% and a BS Rank of 91% (2,024 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 90.80% of the article peer group.

We could have told Democrats they were making a big mistake when it came to Graham Platner. 
Indeed, we did, over and over and over again. 
From the Nazi tattoo to the abuse allegations, the writing was glaringly on the wall. 
But the Democrats like Rep. 
Ro Khanna (CA-17) embraced him and defended him anyway, as did many other Democrats. 
He still became their nominee for the Senate, even knowing there could be more things coming. 
They should all be ashamed of themselves. 
Well, some of what else is out there dropped, as we reported earlier. 
A sexual assault allegation from a 41-year-old Maine woman who is also on the Left. 
It's going to be hard to step around that one, and Platner is making noises about "reflecting" on his candidacy. 
On top of that, another poll dropped this morning, showing he was now four points behind Sen. 
Susan Collins (R-ME). 
So the crashout and the copium over these latest allegations is now in full swing, as some are finally calling for him to step aside, or they're pulling their endorsements. 
Here's former DNC chair Donna Brazile calling on him to step aside before July 13 (so they can replace him with their choice).  
Platner needs time to heal? 
What about the women who had to deal with him? 
And here they go again, investing in a bad candidate and then trying to pull him when it becomes clear he is in deep trouble. 
Where have we seen that before? 
They should never have put him forward to begin with. 
What they really mean here is they need to "heal" their hopes for this position with another candidate. 
We reported on that possibility about a month ago. 
Here's Sen. 
Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), who has his own problems. 
Even Hasan Piker had an issue. 
Finally, Khanna is giving up the ghost. 
He hurt himself so badly with what he did here. 
Cenk Uygur appeared to be trying to hold out, saying he doesn't believe any mainstream media story. 
It reads: 
This is what I know for sure about Platner - every legacy media outlet is trying their hardest to make sure he loses. 
They are investigating every minute and every facet of his life. 
They never do this for insiders. 
They despise outsiders who challenge power. 
The minute a candidate says he's not going to listen to the donors, especially AIPAC, he is set upon 24/7 by people posing as reporters. 
They are the attack dogs of the wealthy and powerful people who run this country - and they hate it when their orders are not follwoed. 
So, no, I don't believe any mainstream media story. 
I think they are agents of propganda and not real news. 
And to my knowledge, they haven't investigated a single component of Susan Collins very long and very corrupt life. 
Because that's precisely the type of corruption that national media loves and wants you to think is normal. 
Expect more embarrassing Democratic moments to come over this debacle. 
Editor’s Note: Every single day, here at RedState, we will stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical Left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve. 
Help us continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration and its successes. 
Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.2%Nick Arama: 10.0%RedState: 7.0%Confirmation Bias14.2%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.3%RedState: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.6%Nick Arama: 2.1%RedState: 3.4%Availability Heuristic6.6%This article: 3.6%Nick Arama: 1.6%RedState: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic3.6%This article: 7.3%Nick Arama: 1.9%RedState: 0.9%Hindsight Bias7.3%This article: 7.1%Nick Arama: 1.5%RedState: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias7.1%This article: 15.3%Nick Arama: 7.3%RedState: 9.2%Framing Effect15.3%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.2%RedState: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.2%RedState: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.1%RedState: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 1.1%RedState: 1.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.9%Nick Arama: 2.6%RedState: 1.7%Pessimism Bias5.9%This article: 58.9%Nick Arama: 21.4%RedState: 13.9%Negativity Bias58.9%This article: 6.9%Nick Arama: 1.3%RedState: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias6.9%This article: 13.9%Nick Arama: 3.2%RedState: 2.0%Fundamental Attribution Error13.9%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.5%RedState: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Nick Arama: 6.1%RedState: 4.7%In-Group Bias3.5%This article: 2.4%Nick Arama: 5.5%RedState: 3.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 1.6%RedState: 2.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 1.5%RedState: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 16.0%Nick Arama: 1.7%RedState: 1.2%Recency Bias16.0%This article: 1.6%Nick Arama: 0.6%RedState: 0.5%Primacy Effect1.6%This article: 1.6%Nick Arama: 0.1%RedState: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias1.6%This article: 12.0%Nick Arama: 11.9%RedState: 6.9%Ad Hominem12.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 3.1%RedState: 2.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.5%Nick Arama: 3.6%RedState: 3.3%Appeal to Authority3.5%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 2.3%RedState: 2.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 1.7%Nick Arama: 1.2%RedState: 1.4%Slippery Slope1.7%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.2%RedState: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 36.1%Nick Arama: 13.6%RedState: 10.1%Hasty Generalization36.1%This article: 3.1%Nick Arama: 0.9%RedState: 0.7%Red Herring3.1%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 1.1%RedState: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 25.0%Nick Arama: 7.6%RedState: 8.5%Appeal to Emotion25.0%This article: 7.5%Nick Arama: 2.7%RedState: 1.8%Begging the Question7.5%This article: 4.3%Nick Arama: 1.6%RedState: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.3%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 1.8%RedState: 0.9%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.7%RedState: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.3%RedState: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.9%Nick Arama: 0.5%RedState: 0.3%Composition/Division0.9%This article: 5.4%Nick Arama: 1.9%RedState: 2.6%Anecdotal5.4%This article: 4.0%Nick Arama: 0.5%RedState: 0.3%No True Scotsman4.0%This article: 14.8%Nick Arama: 1.4%RedState: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.8%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.4%RedState: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 4.0%Nick Arama: 0.2%RedState: 0.2%Special Pleading4.0%This article: 2.6%Nick Arama: 0.7%RedState: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy2.6%This article: 26.7%Nick Arama: 2.8%RedState: 2.4%Unattributed Quote26.7%This article: 2.6%Nick Arama: 2.1%RedState: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection2.6%This article: 42.7%Nick Arama: 34.4%RedState: 21.5%Biased Writer Voice42.7%This article: 15.5%Nick Arama: 7.1%RedState: 4.8%Indoctrination15.5%This article: 0.0%Nick Arama: 0.3%RedState: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 7.3%Nick Arama: 24.4%RedState: 15.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias7.3%This article: 9.7%Nick Arama: 5.2%RedState: 3.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…9.7%

576 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers18%attributed speech472writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageRo Khanna (CA-17) • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageDonna Brazile • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageRuben Gallego (D-AZ) • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageCenk Uygur • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageRedState • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageRedState • 14 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

RedState

100%flagged-word coverage
42 attributed words40% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +97.0 ptsWriter: 3.0%RedState: 100.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning +63.7 ptsWriter: 3.0%RedState: 66.7%66.7%Indoctrination+53.7 ptsWriter: 12.9%RedState: 66.7%66.7%Biased Writer Voice-47.5 ptsWriter: 47.5%RedState: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-32.6 ptsWriter: 32.6%RedState: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.2 ptsWriter: 3.2%RedState: 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.