OutKick88%

Gov. Kathy Hochul's attempt at dunking on President Trump's New York Knicks fandom backfires 79%

By Matt Reigle91%

5/27/2026, 8:15:07 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Anecdotal, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 64.9% saturation with 238 hits. Analysis detected 1,098 faulty-reasoning hits from 367 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 70.7% and a BS Rank of 79% (4,391 of 20,271 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 78.30% of the article peer group.

Everyone is buzzing about the New York Knicks going to the NBA Finals, so much so that President Donald Trump says he's going to head to New York to catch a game. 
Of course, New York Gov. 
Kathy Hochul  who not too long ago was pleading for big-money ex-New Yorkers to return to the state  thought she would try to dunk on the president by questioning his Knicks fandom. 
And, in the process, she wound up majorly embarrassing herself. 
President Trump announced his plans on Wednesday, and Hochul was quickly asked for her response. 
"I’d ask him to name the starting lineup of the 1993 Championship team and see how he does," Hochul said. 
Oh man, Kathy is coming in hot with the sick burn... if only she got the dates right. 
The Chicago Bulls won the NBA Championship in 1993, and the last time the Knicks won it was in 1973. 
It's possible that she was talking about the 1994 NBA Finals  which wrapped up the '93-'94 season  which the Knicks lost to the Houston Rockets. 
No matter how you slice it, this is embarrassing. 
She was either way wrong or trying to pump up a conference championship. 
I mean, even if you ignore the factual disaster that unfolded, is this where politics is at? 
Doing a sports version of, "Oh, you're wearing a Metallica shirt? 
Name five albums, and one of them can't be the Black Album, which is actually called Metallica; people forget that." 
And not only doing that, but muffing it! 
I really don't understand why politicians do this. 
You're not going to win any votes by professing to be a bigger Knicks fan than the president, but you might lose them if people think you're a phony. 
So, how about just steer clear? 
Anyway, it will certainly be interesting to see what happens when the commander in chief heads to Madison Square Garden, where a lot of Knicks fans probably aren't fans of his. 
I mean, Ben Stiller might blow a gasket... if he's at the game and not at some dumb dress-up party. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 6.4%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.9%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 17.2%Matt Reigle: 5.9%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic17.2%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.3%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 7.6%Matt Reigle: 1.4%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 5.8%Fox Nation: 3.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Matt Reigle: 10.8%Fox Nation: 12.0%Framing Effect3.5%This article: 7.9%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion7.9%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.0%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.4%Matt Reigle: 5.4%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias7.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 38.7%Matt Reigle: 9.2%Fox Nation: 10.9%Negativity Bias38.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 4.3%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 8.4%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 8.4%Matt Reigle: 2.1%Fox Nation: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 6.9%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 4.2%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 1.4%Matt Reigle: 0.6%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect1.4%This article: 2.2%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias2.2%This article: 7.1%Matt Reigle: 2.2%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem7.1%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.7%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.1%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 6.0%Matt Reigle: 2.1%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma6.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.4%Matt Reigle: 11.1%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization11.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.1%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 8.7%Matt Reigle: 1.9%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon8.7%This article: 26.4%Matt Reigle: 10.3%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion26.4%This article: 4.6%Matt Reigle: 1.0%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question4.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 20.2%Matt Reigle: 6.8%Fox Nation: 2.3%Anecdotal20.2%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 16.6%Matt Reigle: 1.5%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)16.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 7.1%Matt Reigle: 1.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity7.1%This article: 7.4%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading7.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.4%Matt Reigle: 2.2%Fox Nation: 1.7%Unattributed Quote5.4%This article: 5.4%Matt Reigle: 1.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection5.4%This article: 64.9%Matt Reigle: 19.7%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice64.9%This article: 9.5%Matt Reigle: 1.5%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination9.5%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.9%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

367 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker5.4%attributed speech347writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageKathy Hochul • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Kathy Hochul

100%flagged-word coverage
20 attributed words100% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kathy Hochul: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kathy Hochul: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-68.6 ptsWriter: 68.6%Kathy Hochul: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-10.1 ptsWriter: 10.1%Kathy Hochul: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -4.3 ptsWriter: 4.3%Kathy Hochul: 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.