Policy in Search of a Problem - by Jim Swift - The Bulwark ⁠25%

By Jim Swift⁠37%

7/11/2026, 11:32:06 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Availability Heuristic, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 15% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 499 faulty-reasoning hits from 454 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 37.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠25% (16,500 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 75.40% of the article peer group.

Policy in Search of a Problem 
What You Missed This Week From The Bulwark 
Happy Saturday! 
Overtime is for everyone. 
If you’re a Bulwark+ member: thank you . 
If you’re not, there’s no better time to subscribe to Bulwark+ than today. 
If you like today’s issue, you can share this newsletter with someone you think would value it. 
Why We Won’t Stay Silent About Christian Nationalists in Our Own Churches 
Philip D. 
Bunn , Eli McGowan , and Emily McGowan 
IN 1935, U.S. 
AMBASSADOR TO GERMANY William Dodd warned the State Department of the “virtually dictatorial powers over Protestant Church matters” the new Nazi Minister of Church Affairs possessed. 
Describing the ecclesiastical resistance to Adolf Hitler’s desperate grasp for the keys to the kingdom, Dodd added that “the brunt of battle has been borne chiefly by the Reformed, or Calvinist, wing of the Church whose members find National Socialist totalitarian claims incompatible with their belief in sole responsibility to individual conscience.” 
📚 Bulwark Book Club📚 for August: Mark Twain’s “Pudd’nhead Wilson” 
Send in your questions to Mona Charen and Bill Kristol for the August book club. 
Withdrawing Troops From Europe Is a Policy in Search of a Problem 
THIS WEEK, AS NATO LEADERS gather in Ankara, Turkey for their annual summit, the Department of Defense is continuing a comprehensive review of America’s force posture in Europe—i.e., what forces the United States maintains there, what their capabilities are, and where exactly they’re stationed or deployed. 
The goal, according to a DOD publication, is “that the alliance will pull its own weight in terms of defense funds spent and that Europe will take the lead in maintaining its defense.” 
The One Word Trump Won’t Say in Turkey 
Many Gen Zers Rooted Against Team USA. 
Here’s Why. 
Trump’s attack on TPS for Haitians… is an attack on Springfield, Ohio’s entire community, argues Rev. 
Carl Ruby in a must-read Ohio Capital Journal op-ed. 
Regular readers may remember Ruby from my earlier writing on Springfield and what it’s facing. 
He is the real deal. 
ICYMI: My dispatch from Springfield, Ohio earlier this week. 
The Forgotten Bombing of LaGuardia Airport… It’s been called “one of the greatest cold cases of the 20th century.” 
It remains unsolved. 
But what happened next is almost a worse crime, writes Elon Green in Slate. 
Ever wanna get away? 
I’m always envious of Jay Nordlinger’s travel posts. 
Follow him in Italy! 
This week’s comment prompt: What are your July plans? 
What do you remember from your family vacations that would never happen in 2026? 
Tech support questions? 
Visit Help.TheBulwark.com. 
Editorial photos provided by Getty Images. 
For full credits, please consult the article. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.6%The Bulwark: 5.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.1%Jim Swift: 3.7%The Bulwark: 2.9%Availability Heuristic10.1%This article: 1.5%Jim Swift: 0.9%The Bulwark: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic1.5%This article: 3.1%Jim Swift: 0.9%The Bulwark: 0.6%Hindsight Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 1.2%The Bulwark: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Jim Swift: 3.5%The Bulwark: 6.8%Framing Effect4.4%This article: 2.9%Jim Swift: 0.3%The Bulwark: 0.6%Loss Aversion2.9%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.8%The Bulwark: 1.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.1%Jim Swift: 2.2%The Bulwark: 2.2%Pessimism Bias3.1%This article: 11.5%Jim Swift: 7.3%The Bulwark: 11.2%Negativity Bias11.5%This article: 1.8%Jim Swift: 1.3%The Bulwark: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias1.8%This article: 3.5%Jim Swift: 1.2%The Bulwark: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error3.5%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 9.1%The Bulwark: 3.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 2.3%The Bulwark: 1.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Jim Swift: 4.4%The Bulwark: 1.1%Halo Effect1.1%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.8%The Bulwark: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.0%Jim Swift: 0.8%The Bulwark: 1.5%Recency Bias2.0%This article: 3.3%Jim Swift: 0.9%The Bulwark: 0.5%Primacy Effect3.3%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 3.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.3%Jim Swift: 6.6%The Bulwark: 3.4%Appeal to Authority7.3%This article: 3.1%Jim Swift: 2.3%The Bulwark: 2.2%False Dilemma3.1%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 1.1%The Bulwark: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 1.5%Jim Swift: 3.3%The Bulwark: 8.2%Hasty Generalization1.5%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.2%The Bulwark: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.4%Jim Swift: 7.4%The Bulwark: 5.8%Appeal to Emotion8.4%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 1.2%The Bulwark: 1.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 3.5%Jim Swift: 1.3%The Bulwark: 0.8%Burden of Proof3.5%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 2.8%The Bulwark: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.5%Jim Swift: 0.4%The Bulwark: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.5%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 15.0%Jim Swift: 6.0%The Bulwark: 2.2%Unattributed Quote15.0%This article: 5.7%Jim Swift: 1.8%The Bulwark: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection5.7%This article: 3.1%Jim Swift: 9.0%The Bulwark: 15.3%Biased Writer Voice3.1%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 2.1%The Bulwark: 2.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 5.8%The Bulwark: 5.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jim Swift: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 10.6%Jim Swift: 5.0%The Bulwark: 4.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…10.6%

454 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers26%attributed speech337writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coveragePhilip D. • 2 words • 0.0% coverageEli McGowan • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWilliam Dodd • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWilliam Dodd • 52 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageCarl Ruby • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageElon Green • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageGetty Images • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Elon Green

100%flagged-word coverage
14 attributed words12% of attributed speech75% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Elon Green: 100.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote-20.2 ptsWriter: 20.2%Elon Green: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -14.2 ptsWriter: 14.2%Elon Green: 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.