Wisconsin Election Officials Have Sent Duplicate Mail-In Ballots to Green Bay Voters Again ⁠94%

By Amy Curtis⁠89%

7/7/2026, 8:30:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Appeal to Emotion, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 35.5% saturation with 123 hits. Analysis detected 1,155 faulty-reasoning hits from 346 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 88.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠94% (1,495 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 93.20% of the article peer group.

For the third time in the last four years, the Wisconsin city of Green Bay just mailed duplicate ballots to voters. 
That's the second time this year alone, after 152 duplicate ballots were sent to voters back in April. 
The Wisconsin Election Commission (WEC) says this violates the law while the Green Bay clerk calls it a 'printing error.' 
Republicans, on the other hand, are saying this is a dangerous pattern that could flip the outcome of elections. 
This is part of a clear pattern, the third time in four years that WEC staff has found probable cause of law violations by Clerk Celestine Jeffreys. 
WEC must take strong action, thoroughly investigate the clerk's office and consider removing the clerk. 
Violating the law erodes public confidence in elections. 
"Making an excuse that no harm was done isn't an excuse for violating the law." 
Violating the law erodes public confidence in elections. 
"Making an excuse that no harm was done isn't an excuse for violating the law." 
Serious questions remain about whether any duplicate ballots were actually counted or properly tracked and must be confirmed. 
That's absolutely unacceptable. 
Nowhere on the planet is mailing in balloting considered safe and secure," Gutowski wrote. 
This is true. 
And it's clear mail-in voting favors Democrats, which is why they fight to keep it going. 
If Republicans benefited, they'd end mail-in voting tomorrow. 
The Feds should get involved, even if Democratic Governor Tony Evers and Democratic AG Josh Kaul try to stonewall them. 
We need to just end mail-in voting. 
It's incredibly difficult to see it as anything but, and Democrats have no interest in dispelling this notion. 
That's not a coincidence. 
Editor’s Note: The 2026 Midterms will determine the fate of President Trump’s America First agenda. 
Republicans must maintain control of both chambers of Congress. 
Help Townhall continue to report on the Democrats’ radicalism and inform voters as our nation faces a crossroads. 
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.5%Amy Curtis: 8.6%Townhall: 5.3%Confirmation Bias14.5%This article: 5.2%Amy Curtis: 0.9%Townhall: 0.7%Anchoring Bias5.2%This article: 6.1%Amy Curtis: 3.8%Townhall: 2.8%Availability Heuristic6.1%This article: 12.4%Amy Curtis: 0.7%Townhall: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic12.4%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.5%Townhall: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Amy Curtis: 2.1%Townhall: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias4.0%This article: 12.1%Amy Curtis: 10.8%Townhall: 11.2%Framing Effect12.1%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.4%Townhall: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.2%Townhall: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 1.0%Townhall: 1.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 12.4%Amy Curtis: 2.8%Townhall: 1.9%Pessimism Bias12.4%This article: 25.7%Amy Curtis: 15.5%Townhall: 13.5%Negativity Bias25.7%This article: 9.8%Amy Curtis: 0.6%Townhall: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias9.8%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 3.8%Townhall: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 13.0%Amy Curtis: 4.7%Townhall: 4.6%In-Group Bias13.0%This article: 5.8%Amy Curtis: 6.0%Townhall: 3.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.8%Townhall: 1.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.7%Townhall: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.1%Amy Curtis: 1.2%Townhall: 1.3%Recency Bias6.1%This article: 7.5%Amy Curtis: 0.8%Townhall: 0.6%Primacy Effect7.5%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%Amy Curtis: 8.3%Townhall: 5.0%Ad Hominem5.8%This article: 5.2%Amy Curtis: 4.3%Townhall: 2.0%Straw Man5.2%This article: 4.0%Amy Curtis: 4.2%Townhall: 4.4%Appeal to Authority4.0%This article: 9.0%Amy Curtis: 2.6%Townhall: 1.9%False Dilemma9.0%This article: 5.8%Amy Curtis: 2.5%Townhall: 1.6%Slippery Slope5.8%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.2%Townhall: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.8%Amy Curtis: 16.6%Townhall: 9.1%Hasty Generalization16.8%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.9%Townhall: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 1.6%Townhall: 1.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.9%Amy Curtis: 9.9%Townhall: 11.1%Appeal to Emotion15.9%This article: 10.4%Amy Curtis: 2.9%Townhall: 2.2%Begging the Question10.4%This article: 11.3%Amy Curtis: 2.9%Townhall: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.3%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 1.5%Townhall: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 10.7%Amy Curtis: 2.5%Townhall: 1.5%Burden of Proof10.7%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.2%Townhall: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.2%Townhall: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 2.7%Townhall: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.7%Amy Curtis: 2.3%Townhall: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.7%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.0%Townhall: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.4%Townhall: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 8.7%Amy Curtis: 0.6%Townhall: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy8.7%This article: 12.7%Amy Curtis: 4.4%Townhall: 3.4%Unattributed Quote12.7%This article: 8.4%Amy Curtis: 2.5%Townhall: 3.0%Quote-first Misdirection8.4%This article: 35.5%Amy Curtis: 24.5%Townhall: 16.1%Biased Writer Voice35.5%This article: 9.0%Amy Curtis: 8.1%Townhall: 5.6%Indoctrination9.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.2%Townhall: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.1%Amy Curtis: 22.0%Townhall: 13.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias12.1%This article: 9.2%Amy Curtis: 6.1%Townhall: 5.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…9.2%

346 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers14%attributed speech299writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWisconsin Election Commission (WEC) • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageTownhall • 18 words • 100.0% coverageTownhall • 14 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Townhall

100%flagged-word coverage
32 attributed words68% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Townhall: 100.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning +48.2 ptsWriter: 8.0%Townhall: 56.3%56.3%Biased Writer Voice-36.1 ptsWriter: 36.1%Townhall: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-14.7 ptsWriter: 14.7%Townhall: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-9.7 ptsWriter: 9.7%Townhall: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-5.4 ptsWriter: 5.4%Townhall: 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.