Scott Wiener leads money race to succeed Pelosi, but Connie Chan picking up speed 53%

By Kelly Waldron32%

7/16/2026, 7:50:48 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Recency Bias, Quote-first Misdirection, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 15.5% saturation with 96 hits. Analysis detected 1,093 faulty-reasoning hits from 618 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 51.7% and a BS Rank of 53% (8,430 of 17,596 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 52.10% of the article peer group.

Scott Wiener continues to pull in the most dollars in the congressional race to succeed Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi  but his opponent, Connie Chan, is quickly gaining momentum. 
Filings released on Wednesday show that in the seven-week reporting period from May 14 to June 30, 2026, Wiener raised $571,000, while Connie Chan, his opponent, raised just over $441,000. 
For Chan, that’s more than double what she raised in the prior period. 
Wiener also improved, raising some 40 percent more than in the prior period. 
Chan’s fundraising boost came after Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi endorsed her campaign about two weeks before the June primary. 
Later that month, Pelosi’s own committee gave $4,000 to Chan’s campaign, and “PAC to the Future,” a committee sponsored by Pelosi, gave $10,000, according to filings. 
“Connie Chan defied conventional wisdom with her strong showing in the June primaries, and we have felt the surge of momentum ever since,” said a spokesperson for Chan’s campaign. 
“Fresh off Scott’s first-place showing in the primary, the campaign was proud to earn the support of over 2,000 new donors this quarter. 
These resources will fuel a winning campaign this November and help send Scott to Congress,” said Joe Arellano, the spokesperson for Wiener’s campaign. 
According to their respective campaigns, Chan has more than 3,000 donors and Wiener has 5,320. 
Additional money has come through to support Chan that is not yet reflected in the latest filings, according to her campaign. 
The latest filings only include contributions up until June 30. 
The following week, Pelosi hosted a fundraiser for Chan in Jackson Square that brought in over $100,000, according to Chan’s campaign. 
Tickets to attend the event ranged from $500 to $3,500, the contribution limit for individuals. 
Wiener had his own fundraising boost: a last-minute cash injection that came in the days after Wiener was accosted and made to leave the San Francisco Trans March on Friday, June 26, according to his campaign. 
In the four days following that confrontation, Wiener’s candidate committee received over $127,600 from 1,070 people. 
While both campaigns  and the third-party PACs supporting Chan and Wiener  spent heavily in the run-up to the June primary, records suggest that both campaigns and PACs have shifted gears: They presently appear more focused on raising more, and are spending less. 
Spending will ramp up again as Nov. 
3, Election Day, approaches. 
PAC vs. 
PAC 
On top of their own fundraising, both Chan and Wiener have significant backing from PACs, which operate separately from their candidate committees and aren’t subject to contribution limits. 
Notably: Abundant Future, a PAC supporting Wiener, spent heavily in the last period opposing Saikat Chakrabarti, who came third in the primary. 
That committee spent over $400,000 in the last two weeks of May. 
Families for an Affordable San Francisco, another PAC that is canvassing for Wiener, spent nearly $250,000 in the latest filing period. 
Chan meanwhile has the support of the Working Families for San Francisco PAC, which is primarily funded by labor unions. 
On top of that, the independently wealthy Chakrabarti, who spent millions of dollars funding his primary run, has redirected his former campaign staff to support Chan, and converted his candidate committee to a PAC to support her campaign. 
Wiener, for his part, got a head start in fundraising long before he declared his run. 
As of June 30, he had a total of over $4.4 million in contributions. 
Chan had a total of close to $1.1 million. 
That leaves Wiener sitting on a larger war chest: As of June 30, his campaign had over $1.2 million in cash on hand, while Chan had $362,000. 
Confirmation Bias
4.5%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
11.3%
Representativeness Heuristic
10.7%
Hindsight Bias
0.6%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
11.3%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
2.6%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
8.3%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
15.5%
Self-Serving Bias
7.4%
Fundamental Attribution Error
6.1%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
3.2%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
4.7%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
15.2%
Primacy Effect
2.1%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
11.5%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
1.1%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
3.7%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
8.9%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
2.4%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
7.8%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
8.4%
Quote-first Misdirection
12.1%
Biased Writer Voice
11.3%
Indoctrination
5.8%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

618 words analyzed.

Analysis

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