RedState⁠95%

Jewish Michigan AG Says She Is Unsafe at Her Own Democratic Convention ⁠57%

By Ben Smith⁠66%

7/31/2026, 1:00:17 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.1% saturation with 120 hits. Analysis detected 766 faulty-reasoning hits from 570 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠57% (11,723 of 27,158 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 56.80% of the article peer group.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel says she will skip the Michigan Democratic Party’s August convention because she believes she will be harassed, chased around, and booed off the stage by members of her own party. 
Nessel, who is Jewish, made the announcement Thursday during an Anti-Defamation League roundtable on antisemitism in Lansing. 
She said previous incidents and the party leadership’s response have left her convinced that she would not be welcome at the gathering. 
"I feel like my presence isn’t going to be welcome. 
I don’t want to get chased around. 
I don’t want to get harassed. 
I don’t want to get yelled and screamed at. 
I don’t want to get booed off the stage, irrespective of what I’m saying. 
And I believe that if I go, that is what will happen because it’s been happening to me.” 
Nessel's news broke across X Thursday afternoon. 
This is Michigan’s sitting attorney general saying she does not trust her own political party to provide a safe environment for her. 
Nessel also accused Democratic leaders of failing to address complaints she previously made about party members who allegedly harassed her. 
She acknowledged antisemitism among far-right neo-Nazi groups, but Nessel made clear that she was speaking specifically about the rot inside the Michigan Democratic Party. 
“I can’t speak for the Republican Party because I’m not a member of that party,” Nessel said. 
“But I will speak as a member of the Democratic Party here in Michigan, that something’s got to change. 
This cannot continue.” 
Michigan Democratic Party spokesman Derrick Honeyman responded with a statement promising that the August gathering would be safe. 
“We reject antisemitism, Islamophobia, and all forms of hateful conduct. 
We are working diligently with stakeholders, elected officials, and party membership to prepare for our August convention and look forward to welcoming Michigan Democrats to the Lansing Center on August 29.” 
That carefully worded response did not address Nessel’s allegation that party leaders ignored her earlier complaints. 
It also did not identify any steps the party has taken against the members she says have harassed her. 
Nessel’s fears follow an ugly April convention at which pro-Israel Democrats were shouted down by party activists. 
Democrat Rep. 
Haley Stevens of Michigan (MI-11), a pro-Israel candidate running for the Senate, faced sustained boos while addressing delegates. 
Jewish attendees later described the atmosphere as “shell-shocked.” 
Delegates at that convention also rejected Jewish University of Michigan Regent Jordan Acker and instead backed Amir Makled, whose deleted social media activity included posts supporting Hezbollah and referring to its late leader Hassan Nasrallah as a “martyr.” 
Makled has said that he disavows antisemitism. 
Acker’s home, law office, and vehicle had previously been targeted by anti-Israel vandals. 
After losing the party’s backing, he said antisemitism among Michigan Democrats had become “extensive.” 
The state party is scheduled to hold its nominating convention at the Lansing Center on August 29. 
Delegates will nominate candidates for attorney general, secretary of state, the state Supreme Court, and several university governing boards. 
The convention will help select the Democrat who hopes to replace Nessel as attorney general. 
Nessel, meanwhile, plans to stay away because she expects Democrats to harass her over her Jewish identity and support for Israel. 
Party leaders now have a month to explain how the outgoing attorney general reached the conclusion that avoiding Michigan Democrats altogether is her safest option. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.4%Ben Smith: 2.9%RedState: 6.3%Confirmation Bias7.4%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.5%RedState: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 9.3%Ben Smith: 2.7%RedState: 3.3%Availability Heuristic9.3%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.6%RedState: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.4%RedState: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.5%RedState: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%Ben Smith: 9.4%RedState: 8.5%Framing Effect2.1%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.9%RedState: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.5%RedState: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.2%RedState: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.4%Ben Smith: 0.6%RedState: 1.6%Optimism Bias5.4%This article: 19.1%Ben Smith: 1.2%RedState: 1.6%Pessimism Bias19.1%This article: 21.1%Ben Smith: 8.9%RedState: 13.0%Negativity Bias21.1%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.7%RedState: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.1%RedState: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Ben Smith: 1.3%RedState: 4.1%In-Group Bias4.2%This article: 6.7%Ben Smith: 0.8%RedState: 2.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.9%RedState: 1.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.2%Ben Smith: 0.8%RedState: 1.1%Recency Bias1.2%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.2%RedState: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.0%Ben Smith: 2.6%RedState: 6.1%Ad Hominem3.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.9%RedState: 2.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.0%Ben Smith: 2.2%RedState: 2.9%Appeal to Authority3.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.5%RedState: 2.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.8%RedState: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.7%Ben Smith: 5.0%RedState: 9.2%Hasty Generalization16.7%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.7%RedState: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.3%RedState: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.4%Ben Smith: 3.9%RedState: 7.7%Appeal to Emotion5.4%This article: 0.5%Ben Smith: 1.1%RedState: 1.7%Begging the Question0.5%This article: 3.2%Ben Smith: 2.2%RedState: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.2%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.3%RedState: 0.7%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.4%Ben Smith: 0.5%RedState: 1.0%Burden of Proof4.4%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.4%RedState: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.6%Ben Smith: 1.5%RedState: 2.5%Anecdotal4.6%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 1.2%RedState: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.1%RedState: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.8%Ben Smith: 1.2%RedState: 2.3%Unattributed Quote1.8%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.8%RedState: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 15.4%Ben Smith: 8.5%RedState: 19.5%Biased Writer Voice15.4%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 2.4%RedState: 4.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 0.3%RedState: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 8.0%RedState: 14.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Smith: 2.9%RedState: 3.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

570 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers49%attributed speech293writer words
Selected voice

Haley Stevens

100%flagged-word coverage
18 attributed words6.5% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Biased Writer Voice-30.0 ptsWriter: 30.0%Haley Stevens: 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.