Raw Story93%

Trump's 'stunning' joke could make life 'incredibly treacherous' for GOP: analysts 50%

By Robert Davis72%

7/23/2026, 1:00:10 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Availability Heuristic, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 32.6% saturation with 95 hits. Analysis detected 473 faulty-reasoning hits from 291 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 50.3% and a BS Rank of 50% (10,355 of 20,378 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 50.80% of the article peer group.

One of President Donald Trump's jokes at a rally in Georgia wasn't well received on CNN. 
Trump spoke at a high school in Marietta, Georgia , a wealthy Atlanta suburb, on Wednesday about issues ranging from the upcoming Georgia Governor's race to the 2026 midterms . 
But one joke he made about an issue that most Americans care about stunned panelists on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront." 
Trump went through a spiel about the issues his administration faced when he entered office, one of which was a term he claimed to have never heard before his first press conference. 
" First time I heard it, it was a word, you know, made up by the Democrats: ' affordability,'" Trump said to a silent crowd. 
"They said, ' affordability.' 
I said, 'I've been here one day. 
Don't worry, I'll take care of it.' 
And we're taking care of it." 
Host Erin Burnett described the joke as "stunning." 
Gretchen Carlson, a former Fox News host, did not mince words in her response. 
" None of that is true," Carlson said. 
"He doesn't want to talk about the economy right now, but if you look at every single poll, it's still the number one issue that people will vote on. 
So, affordability is not a hoax." 
Carlson also took Trump to task for trying to blame the Biden administration for his economic woes. 
"You can't continue to blame this economy on Biden," she said. 
"President Trump promised that on his very first day in office, he would reduce prices for the American consumer. 
And until he starts focusing on that, he is making the whole scenario for other republicans in the midterms incredibly treacherous." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.8%Robert Davis: 5.8%Rawstory: 7.6%Confirmation Bias14.8%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 16.8%Robert Davis: 3.5%Rawstory: 4.5%Availability Heuristic16.8%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.3%Rawstory: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.3%Rawstory: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 2.5%Rawstory: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 15.5%Rawstory: 13.7%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.2%Rawstory: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.5%Robert Davis: 0.8%Rawstory: 0.7%Optimism Bias4.5%This article: 11.0%Robert Davis: 2.4%Rawstory: 2.8%Pessimism Bias11.0%This article: 32.6%Robert Davis: 20.3%Rawstory: 22.0%Negativity Bias32.6%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.3%Rawstory: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 3.3%Rawstory: 2.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 2.4%Rawstory: 2.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 1.6%Rawstory: 1.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 1.5%Rawstory: 1.7%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 1.8%Rawstory: 0.7%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 4.4%Rawstory: 6.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.6%Rawstory: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.0%Robert Davis: 5.9%Rawstory: 3.8%Appeal to Authority10.0%This article: 3.8%Robert Davis: 1.0%Rawstory: 2.9%False Dilemma3.8%This article: 7.2%Robert Davis: 2.0%Rawstory: 1.2%Slippery Slope7.2%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.1%Robert Davis: 13.8%Rawstory: 12.0%Hasty Generalization2.1%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.2%Rawstory: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 1.1%Rawstory: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 7.7%Rawstory: 9.2%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 2.1%Robert Davis: 0.8%Rawstory: 1.5%Begging the Question2.1%This article: 6.5%Robert Davis: 1.5%Rawstory: 3.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.5%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.2%Rawstory: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.2%Robert Davis: 2.0%Rawstory: 1.6%Burden of Proof7.2%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.9%Robert Davis: 5.3%Rawstory: 3.9%Anecdotal6.9%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.6%Rawstory: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.7%Robert Davis: 6.5%Rawstory: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.7%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.4%Rawstory: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 22.0%Robert Davis: 6.1%Rawstory: 5.5%Unattributed Quote22.0%This article: 2.7%Robert Davis: 6.5%Rawstory: 4.2%Quote-first Misdirection2.7%This article: 9.6%Robert Davis: 12.9%Rawstory: 15.7%Biased Writer Voice9.6%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.5%Rawstory: 3.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 4.3%Rawstory: 8.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.2%Rawstory: 1.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert Davis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

291 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers52%attributed speech140writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 25 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 7 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 7 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 6 words • 0.0% coverageErin Burnett • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageGretchen Carlson • 8 words • 0.0% coverageGretchen Carlson • 29 words • 100.0% coverageGretchen Carlson • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageGretchen Carlson • 11 words • 0.0% coverageGretchen Carlson • 19 words • 100.0% coverageGretchen Carlson • 21 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Gretchen Carlson

100%flagged-word coverage
94 attributed words62% of attributed speech46% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Unattributed Quote+39.6 ptsWriter: 11.4%Gretchen Carlson: 51.1%51.1%Biased Writer Voice-20.0 ptsWriter: 20.0%Gretchen Carlson: 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.