RedState⁠96%

Upset: Trump-Backed TN Rep. Andy Ogles Falls in GOP Primary to Former Agriculture Commissioner ⁠25%

By Bob Hoge⁠97%

8/6/2026, 5:24:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Begging the Question, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Representativeness Heuristic, with Self-Serving Bias as the most egregious example at 9.9% saturation with 46 hits. Analysis detected 577 faulty-reasoning hits from 466 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 29.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠25% (23,145 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 75.70% of the article peer group.

Although the race was considered competitive, two-term Trump-backed Rep. 
Andy Ogles (TN-5) was expected by many to win the GOP primary Thursday night and head to the general election to fight for a third term. 
That will not happen, however, as he was defeated approximately 53 to 47 percent by former Tennessee Commissioner of Agriculture Dr. 
Charlie Hatcher, a farmer who received significant financial backing from renewable energy interests. 
Although controversial to some, Ogles has been a strong voice on immigration issues, rogue judges, and the threat of radical Islam. 
President Trump had reiterated his support for him before the vote: 
"Andy will be really enshrined as one of the best congressmen that you’ll ever see. 
He’s just fantastic," Trump said. 
"Andy has always been there when we needed him and when I needed him. 
He’s been a great help. 
He’s been a source of inspiration to a lot of people in Congress," Trump said in a post to Truth Social earlier this year. 
Conservative podcaster Breanna Morello is sad to see him go: 
Congressman Andy Ogles is a great man. 
I’m truly disappointed he lost his primary. 
Another L in Congress. 
MORE OGLES: Obama-Appointed Judge Faces Impeachment After Outrageous TPS Ruling 
GOP Lawmakers Debut Hard-Hitting ASSIMILATION Act — Would Gut Broken Immigration System 
The race was at least partly affected by a California billionaire who has a liking for renewable energy subsidies, which Ogles was generally opposed to. 
The Invest in Tomorrow Coalition super PAC had spent roughly $2 million opposing Ogles and supporting Hatcher. 
The group has raised $6.7 million this year, making Ogles a sizable portion of their spending this cycle… 
A Fox News Digital review of FEC filings discovered that the super PAC is bankrolled by Chris Larsen, the California-based billionaire chairman of Ripple, a financial technology company that, according to its website, offers crypto solutions for businesses. 
Larsen is also a frequent Democratic donor, having contributed $5,444,975 to support Kamala Harris's failed presidential campaign. 
Ogles: 
"When you have a group spending roughly $2 million in a Republican primary, that tells you how much money they're making off of government subsidies, and they're upset that the government welfare has been taken away from them," Ogles told Fox News Digital in an interview. 
The good news for Republicans: Hatcher, a fifth-generation Tennessee dairy farmer, is supportive of Trump and has praised him in the past. 
Tennessee’s Republican governor, Bill Lee, said on X Tuesday that Hatcher ran "to serve TN’s 5th District & secure President Trump’s agenda." 
Hatcher will move on to face off against Columbia Mayor Chaz Molder (D) in November in a contest he is widely expected to win. 
Politics: it's not for the faint of heart. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 6.2%RedState: 6.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 5.6%Bob Hoge: 0.2%RedState: 0.7%Anchoring Bias5.6%This article: 1.9%Bob Hoge: 2.8%RedState: 3.2%Availability Heuristic1.9%This article: 9.2%Bob Hoge: 0.8%RedState: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic9.2%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 1.4%RedState: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 2.2%RedState: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 7.7%Bob Hoge: 10.5%RedState: 8.6%Framing Effect7.7%This article: 2.1%Bob Hoge: 0.6%RedState: 0.5%Loss Aversion2.1%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.2%RedState: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.2%RedState: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.7%Bob Hoge: 1.1%RedState: 1.6%Optimism Bias4.7%This article: 1.7%Bob Hoge: 2.1%RedState: 1.6%Pessimism Bias1.7%This article: 6.9%Bob Hoge: 17.6%RedState: 13.0%Negativity Bias6.9%This article: 9.9%Bob Hoge: 1.6%RedState: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias9.9%This article: 8.2%Bob Hoge: 1.8%RedState: 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error8.2%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.3%RedState: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 6.0%RedState: 4.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 3.9%RedState: 2.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 6.7%Bob Hoge: 1.0%RedState: 1.8%Halo Effect6.7%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 1.9%RedState: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.2%Bob Hoge: 1.5%RedState: 1.1%Recency Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.6%RedState: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 8.3%RedState: 6.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 4.4%RedState: 2.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.9%Bob Hoge: 2.6%RedState: 2.9%Appeal to Authority7.9%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 2.4%RedState: 2.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 1.8%RedState: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.1%RedState: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 1.7%Bob Hoge: 12.4%RedState: 9.0%Hasty Generalization1.7%This article: 5.4%Bob Hoge: 0.8%RedState: 0.6%Red Herring5.4%This article: 0.9%Bob Hoge: 1.0%RedState: 0.8%Bandwagon0.9%This article: 8.2%Bob Hoge: 11.5%RedState: 7.7%Appeal to Emotion8.2%This article: 9.9%Bob Hoge: 1.7%RedState: 1.6%Begging the Question9.9%This article: 9.9%Bob Hoge: 2.3%RedState: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.9%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.4%RedState: 0.7%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 1.1%RedState: 1.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.0%RedState: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.4%RedState: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.5%Bob Hoge: 2.1%RedState: 2.4%Anecdotal1.5%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.2%RedState: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 1.4%RedState: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.4%RedState: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.2%RedState: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.2%RedState: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.6%Bob Hoge: 2.9%RedState: 2.3%Unattributed Quote5.6%This article: 3.2%Bob Hoge: 2.6%RedState: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection3.2%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 28.9%RedState: 19.3%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 5.2%RedState: 4.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 0.2%RedState: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 20.7%RedState: 14.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bob Hoge: 3.9%RedState: 3.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

466 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers17%attributed speech388writer words
Selected voice

Ogles

100%flagged-word coverage
46 attributed words59% of attributed speech61% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Unattributed Quote-6.7 ptsWriter: 6.7%Ogles: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.9 ptsWriter: 3.9%Ogles: 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.