Despite strong Democratic turnout, progressive judicial challengers mostly came up short 11%

By Alessandro Marazzi Sassoon7%

5/20/2026, 1:11:28 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Framing Effect, and Hindsight Bias, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 22.4% saturation with 104 hits. Analysis detected 349 faulty-reasoning hits from 465 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 26.3% and a BS Rank of 11% (20,377 of 22,840 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 89.20% of the article peer group.

Even with blockbuster Democratic turnout, most progressive challengers failed to unseat incumbent judges Georgia’s nonpartisan judicial races, which were decided on Tuesday. 
Several voters whom Atlanta Civic Circle and our Election Day reporting partners spoke to said they weren’t even aware there were judicial elections  or that they were decided on Tuesday. 
Consequently, the incumbent advantage prevailed for many judges on the ballot. 
At the top of the judicial ticket, Georgia Supreme Court Justices Sarah Warren and Charlie Bethel, both appointed by Republican governors , fended off vigorous challenges from former Democratic state senator Jen Jordan and plaintiffs attorney Miracle Rankin , respectively. 
The Nathan Deal Judicial Center is home to the Supreme Court of Georgia and the Georgia Court of Appeals. 
(Credit: Harrison Keely/ Creative Commons) 
Rankin came very close, capturing 48.9% of the vote to Bethel’s 51.1%.. 
But Warren decisively prevailed against Jordan with 59.3% of the vote to 40.7%. 
One Atlanta voter, Rebecca, 51, who wished to be identified by first name only, said she was at a loss for information for the judicial races, and voted for the incumbents by default. 
“I f-ed up,” she said, after learning about the progressive challengers in the Georgia Supreme Court race. 
For the Georgia Court of Appeals, Will Wooten , a deputy district attorney for Fulton County, also lost his bid to unseat Judge E. 
Trenton Brown III , who won with 63.8% of the vote. 
Wooten was one of the prosecutors for the Fulton election interference case against President Donald Trump . 
Fulton Superior Court Judge Paige Whittaker at a candidate forum hosted by the Buckhead Young Republicans. 
(Credit: Alessandro Marazzi Sassoon) 
However, two Fulton Superior Court judges, Craig Schwall and Paige Whitaker , lost their seats to challengers. 
Janice Moore ousted Schwall with 60% of the vote and Nikia Smith Sellers squeaked out a win against Whitaker with 50.8% of the vote. 
Old Fourth Ward voter Ryan Charlton also said he didn’t have enough information about the judicial candidates. 
“I think we could make that information more easily accessible. 
We are conditioned to getting things spoon-fed to us,” he said. 
Ryan Charlton, after casting his ballot at the Liberty Baptist Church polling place in Atlanta’s Old Fourth Ward. 
(Credit: Alessandro Marazzi Sassoon) 
Meanwhile, Sandy Springs Democratic primary voter Chris Potter, 42, was struck with the realization that the judicial races he usually ignored actually mattered. 
“Back in the day, I probably didn’t vote in these kinds of elections, because I didn’t think they were important,” he said 
Hailey Weiner and Atlanta Community Press Collective  s Matt Scott contributed reporting. 
The post Despite strong Democratic turnout, progressive judicial challengers mostly came up short appeared first on Atlanta Civic Circle . 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
22.4%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
4.7%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
13.5%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
0%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
2.4%
Red Herring
3.7%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
2.4%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
22.4%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
3.7%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

465 words analyzed.

Analysis

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