MS NOW⁠94%

Gas prices climb past key benchmark, creating another headache for Republicans ⁠78%

By Steve Benen⁠95%

7/20/2026, 1:01:59 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Ad Hominem, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 36.1% saturation with 176 hits. Analysis detected 1,199 faulty-reasoning hits from 487 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 70% and a BS Rank of ⁠78% (4,557 of 20,371 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 77.60% of the article peer group.

On the day Donald Trump announced the start of the war in Iran, the average price American consumers paid for a gallon of gas was $2.98. 
In May, as combat operations continued and the Strait of Hormuz closed, prices climbed past $4.50 a gallon. 
It was around this time that anxieties among Republican officials and candidates reached new levels. 
The party was already facing headwinds ahead of the midterm elections, and the GOP’s troubles were poised to be even worse as angry voters, who were already struggling with affordability and the cost of living, weighed their electoral choices. 
Last month, however, offered some modest relief — both for consumers and the president’s party — as gas prices eased and the United States and Iran embraced a ceasefire. 
The developments renewed hopes that prices might yet move closer to where they were in February by the time Election Day 2026 rolled around. 
Time will tell what people are paying at the pump in 15 weeks, but for now, relief in mid-June has given way to discouragement in mid-July. 
The New York Times reported: 
After a brief respite, the price of gas is back on the rise. 
On Monday, the average price at the pump in the United States climbed to $4 a gallon, according to the AAA motor club, as the war with Iran reignited, halting most shipping and pinching already-depleted global refineries. 
The price has surged 13 cents higher from a week ago, when it averaged $3.87 across the country. 
An Axios report added, “As gas prices go, so may GOP hopes in the midterms.” 
Over the weekend, Energy Secretary Chris Wright appeared on ABC News’ “This Week” and was asked about the latest developments. 
“Gasoline prices today are more than one dollar a gallon cheaper than they were four years ago under the Biden administration,” he argued. 
The Cabinet secretary’s reference to “four years ago” gave away the game: Joe Biden’s presidency wrapped up a year and a half ago, but there was a price spike in 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. 
Wright apparently wants people to compare Biden-era data to Trump-era data, though he’s playing a tiresome shell game that’s intended to obscure a basic fact: Americans are paying more at the pump now than when Biden exited the White House. 
For his part, Trump doesn’t seem to know what to say or do. 
In late June, the Republican president published an item on his social media platform, effectively begging Big Oil to lower prices. 
(That didn’t work.) 
Last week, he went on to tell Fox Business, “I think oil is going to be a little bit of a yo-yo. 
Goes up a little bit, goes down a little bit. 
And when this is over, oil is gonna drop like a rock.” 
Perhaps, but is anyone prepared to say when “this” might be over? 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.2%Steve Benen: 10.6%MS NOW: 7.6%Confirmation Bias7.2%This article: 4.7%Steve Benen: 1.6%MS NOW: 1.2%Anchoring Bias4.7%This article: 3.1%Steve Benen: 3.7%MS NOW: 3.7%Availability Heuristic3.1%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.9%MS NOW: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.6%Steve Benen: 1.9%MS NOW: 1.3%Hindsight Bias0.6%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 3.1%MS NOW: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.7%Steve Benen: 23.2%MS NOW: 15.5%Framing Effect17.7%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.8%MS NOW: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.1%MS NOW: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 13.3%Steve Benen: 1.3%MS NOW: 2.4%Optimism Bias13.3%This article: 7.8%Steve Benen: 3.1%MS NOW: 3.2%Pessimism Bias7.8%This article: 18.3%Steve Benen: 29.4%MS NOW: 19.3%Negativity Bias18.3%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 2.1%MS NOW: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 8.2%Steve Benen: 4.7%MS NOW: 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error8.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.3%MS NOW: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 3.4%MS NOW: 3.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 3.3%MS NOW: 2.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.9%MS NOW: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 4.5%MS NOW: 1.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.1%MS NOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.0%Steve Benen: 2.9%MS NOW: 1.8%Recency Bias8.0%This article: 7.2%Steve Benen: 0.8%MS NOW: 0.6%Primacy Effect7.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 22.4%Steve Benen: 7.9%MS NOW: 4.8%Ad Hominem22.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 1.6%MS NOW: 1.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.6%Steve Benen: 6.4%MS NOW: 5.4%Appeal to Authority7.6%This article: 5.5%Steve Benen: 1.5%MS NOW: 2.2%False Dilemma5.5%This article: 2.5%Steve Benen: 1.7%MS NOW: 2.2%Slippery Slope2.5%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.0%Steve Benen: 8.9%MS NOW: 8.1%Hasty Generalization8.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.7%MS NOW: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 8.0%Steve Benen: 1.2%MS NOW: 0.9%Bandwagon8.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 11.4%MS NOW: 9.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 8.2%Steve Benen: 3.5%MS NOW: 2.4%Begging the Question8.2%This article: 23.2%Steve Benen: 3.3%MS NOW: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)23.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.9%MS NOW: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 1.4%MS NOW: 0.9%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.5%Steve Benen: 1.9%MS NOW: 2.6%Anecdotal2.5%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.1%MS NOW: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.7%Steve Benen: 1.9%MS NOW: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.7%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.1%MS NOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 2.7%Steve Benen: 0.5%MS NOW: 0.3%Personal Incredulity2.7%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 2.2%MS NOW: 1.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.1%Steve Benen: 3.8%MS NOW: 2.5%Unattributed Quote3.1%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 2.6%MS NOW: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 36.1%Steve Benen: 22.8%MS NOW: 14.3%Biased Writer Voice36.1%This article: 0.0%Steve Benen: 1.4%MS NOW: 2.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 4.3%Steve Benen: 8.6%MS NOW: 5.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias4.3%This article: 10.3%Steve Benen: 0.6%MS NOW: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias10.3%This article: 1.0%Steve Benen: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.0%

487 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers14%attributed speech420writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageChris Wright • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 22 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 10 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Chris Wright

100%flagged-word coverage
23 attributed words34% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Biased Writer Voice-41.9 ptsWriter: 41.9%Chris Wright: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -11.9 ptsWriter: 11.9%Chris Wright: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-5.0 ptsWriter: 5.0%Chris Wright: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Chris Wright: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -1.2 ptsWriter: 1.2%Chris Wright: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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