MS NOW95%

Indiana Republicans defied Trump on gerrymandering. Today, they find out what it cost 88%

By Hunter Woodall0% Ebony Davis0%

5/5/2026, 11:48:07 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Framing Effect, and False Dilemma, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 55.1% saturation with 238 hits. Analysis detected 1,316 faulty-reasoning hits from 432 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 81.5% and a BS Rank of 88% (2,097 of 16,813 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 87.50% of the article peer group.

Indiana Republicans who defied Donald Trump are fighting for their political lives Tuesday in a key measure of whether the president’s grip on his own party is starting to slip. 
The contests for state Senate seats in Indiana’s part-time legislature would ordinarily draw little national attention. 
But after a December vote in which a bloc of Indiana Republicans resisted the White House’s pressure campaign and voted against gerrymandering the state’s two Democratic-held congressional districts out of existence, Trump set out to make examples of them. 
On social media, Trump endorsed challengers against seven of the eight sitting GOP state senators who voted against the gerrymandering push: Jim Buck, Spencer Deery, Dan Dernulc, Greg Goode, Travis Holdman, Linda Rogers and Greg Walker. 
“There are eight Great Patriots running against long seated RINOS  Let’s see how those RINOS do tonight!” 
Trump said in a Truth Social post Tuesday before polls closed, deploying a label  Republican In Name Only  that has become his standard brand for those who defy him regardless of their conservative bonafides. 
For Trump, who has carried Indiana in each of his three presidential campaigns and faces no meaningful threat to his standing in the state, the primaries amount to a test of whether he can punish defectors inside his own party over an issue many voters have barely registered, in races usually decided by yard signs and county chairs rather than national politics. 
Beneath that is a larger question, one that will only sharpen as his second term wears on: whether a president who is constitutionally barred from running again and whose approval ratings are the lowest of his tenure still commands the fear that built his hold on the GOP in the first place. 
Trump has a track record of endorsing primary challengers in races around the country to enforce and reward loyalty  most prominently against the House Republicans who voted to impeach him after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. 
Capitol. 
Nearly all were driven from office. 
Wading into something as relatively small scale as state Senate primaries, however  especially over an issue that may be more esoteric for many voters  has provided a clash between national politics and the kind of grassroots approach that typically looms large in these kinds of races. 
It is one thing for Trump to be furious about the December vote in Indianapolis; it is another for Republican primary voters in Terre Haute or West Lafayette to be. 
Photos: Courtesy of the campaigns 
Confirmation Bias
9.3%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
1.4%
Representativeness Heuristic
11.1%
Hindsight Bias
12%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
22.2%
Loss Aversion
1.6%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
37.5%
Negativity Bias
12.7%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
14.4%
Actor-Observer Bias
9%
In-Group Bias
4.2%
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
21.3%
Slippery Slope
12%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
15.7%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
4.2%
Appeal to Emotion
11.1%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
18.3%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
8.3%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
3.7%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
11.1%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
4.2%
Quote-first Misdirection
4.2%
Biased Writer Voice
55.1%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

432 words analyzed.

Analysis

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