Speaker summary
70% 60 analyzed articles/videos 2,859.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chuck Schumer results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Ad Hominem , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 25.9% saturation with 855.126 hits . Analysis detected 5,822.342 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,859.333 analyzed words across 60 articles, generating a BS Score of 5.3% and a BS Rank of 3% (26,142 of 26,953 speakers). This Chuck Schumer is better (less manipulative) than 97.00% of the peer group. Chuck Schumer
Speaker details
Total words: 2,859.333
Article count: 60
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed speakers
3% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 3.0% percentile 5.3% BS Score60 analyzed videos2.9K 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% Speaker 13.2% 13.2% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Speaker 15.1% 15.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Speaker 26.5% 26.5% Quote-first Misdirection Sitewide 0.0% Speaker 9.2% 9.2% Politically Left Leaning … Sitewide 2.0% Speaker 10.5% 10.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Speaker 3.7% 3.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Speaker 1.8% 1.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Speaker 25.9% 25.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Speaker 0.6% 0.6% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Speaker 1.5% 1.5% 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: Speaker 13.2%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 26.5%, sitewide 15.9% Negativity Bias: Speaker 25.9%, sitewide 19.2% Ad Hominem: Speaker 15.1%, sitewide 2.2% Appeal to Authority: Speaker 3.7%, sitewide 11.1% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 10.5%, sitewide 2.0% Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 9.2%, sitewide 0.0% Availability Heuristic: Speaker 1.8%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Speaker 8.1%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Speaker 3.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Speaker 6.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Speaker 0.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 3.2%, sitewide 5.3% Begging the Question: Speaker 4.9%, sitewide 1.7% Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% False Dilemma: Speaker 4.5%, sitewide 1.5% Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 2.4%, sitewide 3.7% Unattributed Quote: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 1.1% Pessimism Bias: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 1.9% Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 3.3% Bandwagon: Speaker 3.0%, sitewide 2.2% Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 3.0%, sitewide 2.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Speaker rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst