The Folly of Burrito Populism 41%

By Darel E. Paul46%

8/7/2026, 4:17:03 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Hindsight Bias, Framing Effect, and Biased Writer Voice, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 13.4% saturation with 34 hits. Analysis detected 317 faulty-reasoning hits from 254 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 38% and a BS Rank of 41% (17,956 of 30,190 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 59.50% of the article peer group.

No issue encapsulates Americans’ current political ennui more than grocery prices. 
A recent poll found they were the most common complaint of American consumers, more than housing, transportation, or health care. 
This fall, Maryland will become the first state to ban dynamic pricing by large grocery stores and grocery delivery apps. 
Last month, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani promised 30 percent lower prices in the city’s five forthcoming government-run grocery stores. 
Democratic nominee for US Senate Abdul El-Sayed was sure to mention the affordability of groceries in his victory speech. 
Covid-era grocery inflation was certainly steep. 
In 2022 alone, grocery prices rose more than 11 percent. 
From June 2019 to June 2026, the price of “food at home” increased by 33 percent. 
Meat prices are up nearly 50 percent and eggs are up 40 percent. 
This inflation was especially painful as it followed a seven-year period (2012-19) in which grocery prices had risen a mere 4.3 percent, making for a barely perceptible 0.6 percent annual average. 
Yet since October 2023, annualized inflation in groceries has been only 2.1 percent. 
This is lower than the average rate throughout the 1990s and 2000s. 
It is below the annualized general inflation rate of 3.2 percent since October 2023. 
By any reasonable measure, grocery price increases over the past three years have been low. 
So why are groceries so prominent in American political discourse today? 
Why are grocery price controls and government-run grocery stores capturing the imagination, especially on the political left? 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.4%Darel E. Paul: 5.0%Compact: 7.6%Confirmation Bias13.4%This article: 6.3%Darel E. Paul: 4.6%Compact: 0.4%Anchoring Bias6.3%This article: 4.3%Darel E. Paul: 2.2%Compact: 2.6%Availability Heuristic4.3%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 12.2%Darel E. Paul: 3.1%Compact: 1.0%Hindsight Bias12.2%This article: 5.9%Darel E. Paul: 4.6%Compact: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias5.9%This article: 10.2%Darel E. Paul: 12.0%Compact: 4.4%Framing Effect10.2%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Darel E. Paul: 0.6%Compact: 2.6%Pessimism Bias2.4%This article: 5.1%Darel E. Paul: 1.3%Compact: 6.5%Negativity Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.1%Darel E. Paul: 2.6%Compact: 1.1%Recency Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 1.7%Compact: 1.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 3.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 6.7%Darel E. Paul: 1.7%Compact: 2.4%False Dilemma6.7%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 2.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.1%Darel E. Paul: 3.8%Compact: 11.1%Hasty Generalization5.1%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 7.9%Darel E. Paul: 2.0%Compact: 0.5%Bandwagon7.9%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 4.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 2.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.5%Compact: 1.4%Begging the Question2.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 3.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.6%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.8%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.5%Darel E. Paul: 1.9%Compact: 2.4%Anecdotal7.5%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.9%Darel E. Paul: 1.5%Compact: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.9%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.5%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.9%Darel E. Paul: 2.0%Compact: 2.2%Unattributed Quote7.9%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 10.2%Darel E. Paul: 9.4%Compact: 8.5%Biased Writer Voice10.2%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 1.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 6.7%Darel E. Paul: 3.3%Compact: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 1.7%Compact: 3.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Darel E. Paul: 0.0%Compact: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

254 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers16%attributed speech214writer words
Selected voice

Zohran Mamdani

100%flagged-word coverage
21 attributed words53% of attributed speech75% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-12.1 ptsWriter: 12.1%Zohran Mamdani: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-9.3 ptsWriter: 9.3%Zohran Mamdani: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-7.9 ptsWriter: 7.9%Zohran Mamdani: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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