Daily Kos85%

Trump seems entirely clueless on Arizona’s primaries 78%

By Emily Singer83%

7/22/2026, 8:30:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Fundamental Attribution Error, and Confirmation Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 49.7% saturation with 189 hits. Analysis detected 1,067 faulty-reasoning hits from 380 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 69.1% and a BS Rank of 78% (4,828 of 21,180 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 77.20% of the article peer group.

President Donald Trump seems to be very confused about Tuesday’s elections in Arizona. 
“MAGA CANDIDATES WON EVERYTHING LAST NIGHT IN ARIZONA, A COMPLETE SWEEP!!! 
” he wrote on Truth Social Wednesday. 
“THE DUMOCRATS ARE DUMBFOUNDED. 
AFTER DECADES, ARIZONA IS BECOMING A REPUBLICAN STATE. 
CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL! 
” 
Where to even begin with this? 
Despite Trump’s suggestion, Arizona is not a blue state. 
Since 1948, Republicans have won the state in every presidential election save for those in 1992 and 2020—when Trump narrowly lost to Joe Biden, in part leading to the election-denying psychosis from which Trump has been suffering for almost six years. 
Both of Arizona’s Senate seats were also held by Republicans for 23 years before Kyrsten Sinema won in 2018. 
Republicans also held the governorship in the state for 14 years until Katie Hobbs won in 2022. 
Clearly, a Democratic state Arizona is not. 
What’s more, Trump claiming that Democrats are “dumbfounded” after MAGA Republicans secured a “complete sweep” suggests that he thought that Tuesday’s elections were a general election—not primaries. 
If anything, Democrats were dumbfounded by the stupidity of Arizona Republican voters to nominate lunatic MAGA election deniers who will make competitive races even more difficult for Republicans in November. 
For example, Rep. 
Andy Biggs—a right-wing conspiracy theorist who helped Trump try to overturn the 2020 election—won the GOP gubernatorial nomination over the more electable Rep. 
David Schweikert. 
Public polling shows Democratic incumbent Hobbs ahead of Biggs. 
Related | Iran war keeps dashing GOP’s midterm hopes 
Indeed, there were already signs that Republicans will struggle in Arizona this fall. 
According to pollster John Couvillon, 54% of all primary voters in Arizona pulled a Republican ballot. 
That’s lower than the 58% in 2022—a year when Democrats won the gubernatorial and Senate races. 
In 2018—when Democrats flipped Jeff Flake’s Senate seat and a House seat—56% voted in the GOP primary. 
But Trump is probably just happy that his endorsees won again, after a number of the Republicans he backed lost their primaries in recent weeks. 
Still, his error-ridden Truth Social posts aren’t helping to tamp down the chatter about Trump’s cognitive abilities—or inabilities. 
Correction: A previous version of this story misstated how many times Democrats have won a presidential election in Arizona. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 20.0%Emily Singer: 6.3%Daily Kos: 5.7%Confirmation Bias20.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.9%Daily Kos: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Emily Singer: 4.0%Daily Kos: 3.3%Availability Heuristic2.4%This article: 4.2%Emily Singer: 1.7%Daily Kos: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic4.2%This article: 10.8%Emily Singer: 1.8%Daily Kos: 0.9%Hindsight Bias10.8%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 2.7%Daily Kos: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Emily Singer: 9.8%Daily Kos: 9.0%Framing Effect7.1%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.4%Daily Kos: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.5%Daily Kos: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.6%Emily Singer: 2.1%Daily Kos: 1.4%Optimism Bias6.6%This article: 3.4%Emily Singer: 2.9%Daily Kos: 2.0%Pessimism Bias3.4%This article: 37.4%Emily Singer: 19.0%Daily Kos: 15.4%Negativity Bias37.4%This article: 7.9%Emily Singer: 1.1%Daily Kos: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias7.9%This article: 20.8%Emily Singer: 4.3%Daily Kos: 2.6%Fundamental Attribution Error20.8%This article: 6.6%Emily Singer: 0.2%Daily Kos: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias6.6%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 2.3%Daily Kos: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 1.3%Daily Kos: 1.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.2%Daily Kos: 1.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 1.2%Daily Kos: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.2%Emily Singer: 2.2%Daily Kos: 1.4%Recency Bias4.2%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.2%Daily Kos: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 13.9%Emily Singer: 8.8%Daily Kos: 5.9%Ad Hominem13.9%This article: 7.9%Emily Singer: 0.7%Daily Kos: 1.4%Straw Man7.9%This article: 2.4%Emily Singer: 3.8%Daily Kos: 3.2%Appeal to Authority2.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 2.0%Daily Kos: 2.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 2.0%Daily Kos: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.6%Daily Kos: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.5%Emily Singer: 9.8%Daily Kos: 9.7%Hasty Generalization5.5%This article: 3.9%Emily Singer: 1.3%Daily Kos: 0.5%Red Herring3.9%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.5%Daily Kos: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 7.6%Emily Singer: 7.8%Daily Kos: 7.3%Appeal to Emotion7.6%This article: 1.8%Emily Singer: 1.4%Daily Kos: 1.9%Begging the Question1.8%This article: 10.8%Emily Singer: 6.2%Daily Kos: 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.8%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 1.8%Daily Kos: 0.5%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 1.2%Daily Kos: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 5.0%Emily Singer: 0.3%Daily Kos: 0.4%Composition/Division5.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 1.5%Daily Kos: 2.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.1%Emily Singer: 1.8%Daily Kos: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.1%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.0%Daily Kos: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.2%Daily Kos: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 0.1%Daily Kos: 0.5%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.7%Emily Singer: 2.7%Daily Kos: 2.7%Unattributed Quote4.7%This article: 1.8%Emily Singer: 1.7%Daily Kos: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection1.8%This article: 49.7%Emily Singer: 27.3%Daily Kos: 23.1%Biased Writer Voice49.7%This article: 6.1%Emily Singer: 1.4%Daily Kos: 2.1%Indoctrination6.1%This article: 18.7%Emily Singer: 14.3%Daily Kos: 10.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias18.7%This article: 2.4%Emily Singer: 0.5%Daily Kos: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Singer: 2.8%Daily Kos: 2.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

380 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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