Keyword summary
89% 8 analyzed articles/videos 5,549 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tulsi Gabbard results contain 48 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem , Confirmation Bias , and Appeal to Emotion , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 13.7% saturation with 3,211 hits . Analysis detected 37,356 faulty-reasoning hits from 23,441 analyzed words across 8 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.3% and a BS Rank of 60% (14,852 of 36,929 keywords). This Tulsi Gabbard is worse (more manipulative) than 59.80% of the peer group. Tulsi Gabbard
Keyword details
Total words: 23,441
Article count: 8
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
60% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 59.8% percentile 3.3% BS Score8 analyzed articles23.4K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 7.8% 7.8% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Keyword 12.7% 12.7% Politically Right Leaning… Sitewide 1.4% Keyword 11.7% 11.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 2.5% 2.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 4.7% 4.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 13.7% 13.7% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 10.6% 10.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 12.5% 12.5% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Keyword 1.1% 1.1% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Keyword 0.7% 0.7% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 10% 10% 20% 20% 30% 30% 40% 40% 50% 50% Framing Effect: Keyword 7.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 13.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 12.1%, sitewide 15.9% Ad Hominem: Keyword 12.7%, sitewide 2.2% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 12.5%, sitewide 7.5% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Keyword 11.7%, sitewide 1.4% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 4.7%, sitewide 11.1% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 10.6%, sitewide 5.3% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 9.6%, sitewide 8.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 9.1% In-Group Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 4.1%, sitewide 4.6% Begging the Question: Keyword 3.8%, sitewide 1.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 3.7%, sitewide 2.7% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 3.1% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 2.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 3.3% Slippery Slope: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 1.7% Indoctrination: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 0.0% Horn Effect: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 1.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst