Stacey Abrams on why gutting of the US Voting Rights Act is 'evil' – Stateside with Kai and Carter ⁠100%

By Kai Wright⁠0% Jonathan Menjivar⁠0% Ivan Kuraev⁠0% Anabel Bacon⁠0% Monica Espitia⁠0%

5/13/2026, 9:00:07 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Actor-Observer Bias, and In-Group Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 74.4% saturation with 90 hits. Analysis detected 647 faulty-reasoning hits from 121 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ⁠100% (69 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 99.70% of the article peer group.

The US supreme court demolished the 1965 Voting Rights Act when they ruled in Louisiana v Callais in April that states can’t consider race in redistricting. 
Southern states from Tennessee to Alabama have rushed to erase majority Black districts, sparking chaos for the midterm elections. 
Kai Wright talks with Stacey Abrams, voting rights activist and former Georgia house minority leader, about the fallout from the decision, and why, even now, she thinks the way forward is still through engaging more voters to participate in democracy: “They have fractured communities and said we’re going to scatter these seeds. 
Our job is to grow.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.7%Kai Wright: 3.6%the Guardian: 3.7%Confirmation Bias15.7%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 21.5%Kai Wright: 4.9%the Guardian: 3.1%Availability Heuristic21.5%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 37.2%Kai Wright: 60.3%the Guardian: 6.1%Framing Effect37.2%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.1%Kai Wright: 14.8%the Guardian: 2.5%Optimism Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 2.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 57.0%Kai Wright: 32.8%the Guardian: 10.4%Negativity Bias57.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 43.0%Kai Wright: 9.7%the Guardian: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias43.0%This article: 43.0%Kai Wright: 10.7%the Guardian: 1.3%In-Group Bias43.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 9.7%the Guardian: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 3.2%the Guardian: 3.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 2.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 3.2%the Guardian: 3.8%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 15.7%Kai Wright: 19.1%the Guardian: 6.3%Hasty Generalization15.7%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 74.4%Kai Wright: 46.6%the Guardian: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion74.4%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 15.7%Kai Wright: 3.6%the Guardian: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)15.7%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 43.0%Kai Wright: 9.7%the Guardian: 3.1%Anecdotal43.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 21.5%Kai Wright: 4.9%the Guardian: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)21.5%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 43.0%Kai Wright: 19.5%the Guardian: 1.6%Unattributed Quote43.0%This article: 43.0%Kai Wright: 23.0%the Guardian: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection43.0%This article: 21.5%Kai Wright: 50.2%the Guardian: 10.4%Biased Writer Voice21.5%This article: 19.8%Kai Wright: 5.4%the Guardian: 1.8%Indoctrination19.8%This article: 15.7%Kai Wright: 40.8%the Guardian: 3.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias15.7%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kai Wright: 6.0%the Guardian: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

121 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers47%attributed speech64writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageKai Wright • 52 words • 100.0% coverageStacey Abrams • 5 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Kai Wright

100%flagged-word coverage
52 attributed words91% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kai Wright: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kai Wright: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-40.6 ptsWriter: 40.6%Kai Wright: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-29.7 ptsWriter: 29.7%Kai Wright: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-29.7 ptsWriter: 29.7%Kai Wright: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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