It Sure Looks Like California Democrats Are Trying to Rig the Upcoming Voter ID Initiative Vote 81%

By Amy Curtis90%

7/22/2026, 8:00:24 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 36% saturation with 312 hits. Analysis detected 2,232 faulty-reasoning hits from 866 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 72.7% and a BS Rank of 81% (3,996 of 20,453 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 80.50% of the article peer group.

In California, voters will soon be able to cast a ballot about Proposition 39, the Voter Identification, Citizenship Verification, and Registered Voter List Administration Initiative, which would create a constitutional amendment requiring Californians to show an ID when they vote and that state officials clean up voter rolls and verify citizenship. 
Now, it seems California Attorney General Rob Bonta has changed the language of Prop 39 in an effort to rig the election. 
Carl DeMaio is blasting Attorney General Rob Bonta for a "blatant attempt to rig the November election" after he changed the ballot title on the Prop 39 Voter ID Initiative at the last minute to one that discourages voters from approving the bipartisan measure. 
DeMaio, who is one of the initiative's official proponent authors and a leader of the YES on Prop 39 campaign, hays his coalition is exploring "every legal avenue" to hold the Attorney General accountable for election tampering by manipulating the ballot title on the measure. 
"California politicians know that a supermajority of California voters support Prop 39's bipartisan solution for Voter ID—so now they are corruptly trying to rig the election by putting a biased and dishonest title on this common-sense measure," said DeMaio. 
DeMaio points out that the Attorney General had already provided a ballot title for Prop 39 in September of 2025. 
That original ballot title was on the initiative petitions signed by over 1.3 million California voters to force the bipartisan Voter ID initiative on the ballot this November. 
"When Rob Bonta didn't think we could get the signatures on Prop 39, he provided a relatively fair ballot title  but now that the citizens have forced Prop 39 on the ballot, he decides at the last minute to corruptly try to rig the election against Prop 39 by changing the ballot title to a biased and dishonest one," DeMaio notes. 
Read the two different ballot titles for Prop 39—and judge for yourself: 
ORIGINAL PROP 39 TITLE (September 19, 2025): 
ESTABLISHES ADDITIONAL VOTER IDENTIFICATION AND CITIZENSHIP VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. 
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. 
This measure would amend the California Constitution to further require that voters present government-issued identification at the polls or the last four digits of a government-issued identification number when voting by mail; the State provide voter identification cards on request; and elections officials annually report percentage of each county's voters whose citizenship they have verified. 
REVISED PROP 39 TITLE (July 21, 2026): 
PROHIBITS CITIZENS FROM VOTING UNLESS THEY PRESENT GOVERNMENT-ISSUED IDENTIFICATION. 
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. 
Invalidates mail ballots that do not have last four digits of designated government-issued identification number written on envelope. 
Prohibits in-person voting without presenting government-issued identification. 
DeMaio is now conferring with the YES on Prop 39 coalition as they explore taking legal action against the Attorney General  but he concedes that the politician-appointed judges have traditionally allowed state politicians to manipulate ballot titles in recent years. 
DeMaio points to Prop 6 in 2018  the Gas Tax Repeal Initiative. 
That measure originally was titled "Gas Tax Repeal Initiative" but then Attorney General Xavier Becerra (who is now running for Governor) changed the title at the last minute to "Eliminates Recently Enacted Road Repair and Transportation Funding." 
Because of the dishonest and biased title placed on Prop 6, politicians took a measure that enjoyed 65% voter approval down to just 45%  and California drivers are now stuck paying the highest gas prices in the country as a result. 
DeMaio says, despite the effort by Bonta and other politicians to rig the election against Prop 39, he still expects voters will approve the measure in November. 
"We expected corrupt politicians like Rob Bonta to try to deprive voters of a fair election on Prop 39  but this biased and dishonest ballot title takes election rigging to a whole new level even for California," DeMaio notes. 
"These corrupt politicians are showing every voter why we need to enact Prop 39 to implement a bipartisan solution to Voter ID," DeMaio concludes. 
For more information on Yes on Prop 39, visit www.VoterIDInitiative.com 
It sure seems like Bonta is trying to thwart the will of California voters. 
It wouldn't be the first time. 
Voters also overwhelmingly passed Proposition 36 in 2024. 
Newsom railed against that tough-on-crime initiative, even saying he didn't recognize the California that would pass such a measure. 
As of last August, California Democrats in Sacramento simply refused to fund Prop 36, rendering it moot. 
It's appalling. 
Voter ID is overwhelmingly popular across all demographics, including Democrats and black voters. 
They want our elections to be secure and for our votes to be protected from fraud. 
Democrats have spelled out exactly why they oppose voter ID: they'll lose. 
And after the shenanigans of the past several years, it's clear they deserve to. 
But defenders of democracy. 
Or something. 
Editor's Note: The Democrats are doing everything in their power to undermine the integrity of our elections. 
Help us tell the truth about the SAVE America Act and how it will prevent voter fraud. 
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 35.9%Amy Curtis: 8.6%Townhall: 5.2%Confirmation Bias35.9%This article: 2.3%Amy Curtis: 0.9%Townhall: 0.7%Anchoring Bias2.3%This article: 5.2%Amy Curtis: 3.7%Townhall: 2.8%Availability Heuristic5.2%This article: 4.7%Amy Curtis: 0.7%Townhall: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic4.7%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.4%Townhall: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 2.1%Townhall: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Amy Curtis: 10.6%Townhall: 11.4%Framing Effect10.4%This article: 6.2%Amy Curtis: 0.4%Townhall: 0.3%Loss Aversion6.2%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.3%Townhall: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.1%Amy Curtis: 1.0%Townhall: 1.5%Optimism Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 2.8%Townhall: 1.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 36.0%Amy Curtis: 15.2%Townhall: 13.5%Negativity Bias36.0%This article: 3.1%Amy Curtis: 0.5%Townhall: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 3.6%Townhall: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 2.8%Amy Curtis: 4.7%Townhall: 4.7%In-Group Bias2.8%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 6.2%Townhall: 3.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.8%Townhall: 1.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.7%Townhall: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.4%Amy Curtis: 1.3%Townhall: 1.3%Recency Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.8%Townhall: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%Amy Curtis: 8.3%Townhall: 5.1%Ad Hominem5.1%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 4.4%Townhall: 2.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.0%Amy Curtis: 4.1%Townhall: 4.4%Appeal to Authority2.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 2.7%Townhall: 2.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 2.5%Townhall: 1.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 2.8%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Circular Reasoning2.8%This article: 7.6%Amy Curtis: 16.7%Townhall: 9.2%Hasty Generalization7.6%This article: 0.2%Amy Curtis: 0.7%Townhall: 0.5%Red Herring0.2%This article: 4.5%Amy Curtis: 1.6%Townhall: 1.3%Bandwagon4.5%This article: 17.3%Amy Curtis: 9.9%Townhall: 11.3%Appeal to Emotion17.3%This article: 8.5%Amy Curtis: 3.1%Townhall: 2.3%Begging the Question8.5%This article: 18.2%Amy Curtis: 2.8%Townhall: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)18.2%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 1.6%Townhall: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 11.7%Amy Curtis: 2.4%Townhall: 1.5%Burden of Proof11.7%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: 2.2%Amy Curtis: 2.7%Townhall: 1.4%Anecdotal2.2%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.2%Townhall: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 2.3%Townhall: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.1%Townhall: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 5.2%Amy Curtis: 0.4%Townhall: 0.2%Special Pleading5.2%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.6%Townhall: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 4.1%Townhall: 3.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 3.9%Amy Curtis: 2.4%Townhall: 3.0%Quote-first Misdirection3.9%This article: 33.7%Amy Curtis: 24.7%Townhall: 16.3%Biased Writer Voice33.7%This article: 6.7%Amy Curtis: 8.0%Townhall: 5.7%Indoctrination6.7%This article: 0.0%Amy Curtis: 0.2%Townhall: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Amy Curtis: 22.2%Townhall: 14.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias5.2%This article: 7.6%Amy Curtis: 6.2%Townhall: 5.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.6%

866 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker39%attributed speech531writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 51 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 44 words • 100.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 45 words • 0.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 62 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 55 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 41 words • 100.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 27 words • 0.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 40 words • 100.0% coverageCarl DeMaio • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Carl DeMaio

96%flagged-word coverage
335 attributed words100% of attributed speech77% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Biased Writer Voice+55.0 ptsWriter: 12.4%Carl DeMaio: 67.5%67.5%Politically Right Leaning -8.5 ptsWriter: 8.5%Carl DeMaio: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -0.7 ptsWriter: 7.9%Carl DeMaio: 7.2%7.2%Indoctrination+0.8 ptsWriter: 6.4%Carl DeMaio: 7.2%7.2%Quote-first Misdirection-6.4 ptsWriter: 6.4%Carl DeMaio: 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.