WDIV18%

2026 Augusta Township Primary Election Results 18%

8/3/2026, 6:00:47 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Indoctrination, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 32.5% saturation with 37 hits. Analysis detected 148 faulty-reasoning hits from 114 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 26.8% and a BS Rank of 18% (22,931 of 27,655 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 82.90% of the article peer group.

2026 Augusta Township Primary Election Results 
Find primary election results for Augusta Township. 
Here are the 2026 primary election results in Augusta Township: 
Augusta Township 2026 Primary Election Results 
Washtenaw County 2026 Primary Election Results 
Michigan 2026 Primary Election Results 
Copyright 2026 by WDIV ClickOnDetroit - All rights reserved. 
If you need help with the Public File, call (313) 222-0566 
At WDIV, we are committed to informing and delighting our audience. 
In our commitment to covering our communities with innovation and excellence, we incorporate Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies to enhance our news gathering, reporting, and presentation processes. 
Read our article to see how we are using Artificial Intelligence. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%WDIV: 1.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 2.0%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 2.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 22.8%WDIV: 1.4%Optimism Bias22.8%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 4.8%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.4%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 9.6%WDIV: 1.7%Halo Effect9.6%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 22.8%WDIV: 3.4%Appeal to Authority22.8%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 1.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 5.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 9.6%WDIV: 0.6%Burden of Proof9.6%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 1.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 1.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 9.6%WDIV: 1.4%Biased Writer Voice9.6%This article: 22.8%WDIV: 1.6%Indoctrination22.8%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%WDIV: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 32.5%WDIV: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…32.5%

114 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker32%attributed speech77writer words
Selected voice

WDIV

100%flagged-word coverage
37 attributed words100% of attributed speech14% writer coverage
0%37.5%75.0%Indoctrination+70.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%WDIV: 70.3%70.3%Attempt to Sell a Product +56.0 ptsWriter: 14.3%WDIV: 70.3%70.3%Biased Writer Voice+29.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%WDIV: 29.7%29.7%

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.