Judge grants motion to keep Danny Ford on special election ballot until hearing 14%

By Bella Carpentier7%

7/31/2026, 12:51:13 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Negativity Bias, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 22% saturation with 81 hits. Analysis detected 474 faulty-reasoning hits from 369 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 22.9% and a BS Rank of 14% (26,468 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 86.50% of the article peer group.

Danny Ford II, who ran as a Republican for commissioner of agriculture, is suing the South Carolina Republican Party after he was deemed ineligible to run in the Senate race. 
Ford, a Clemson farmer who lost the June primary to Cody Simpson, filed to run in the special Republican Senate primary following Lindsey Graham's death on July 11. 
However, the state Republican Party determined that Ford did not meet candidate qualifications. 
Ford filed a lawsuit against the South Carolina Republican Party and the South Carolina State Election Commission on July 30. 
He is seeking a temporary restraining order to keep him on the special election ballot. 
A judge granted that request on July 31. 
The judge's order prevents state Republicans from keeping Ford off the ballot until the case is heard in court. 
A hearing is scheduled for Aug. 3 at 9:30 a.m. in the Richland County Court of Common Pleas. 
According to the lawsuit, the state Republican Party recently changed its rule so that a Republican candidate must have been registered to the party for at least 90 days, and must have voted in two of the three past statewide Republican primaries. 
The new rule took effect on July 1. 
The lawsuit states that Ford was told he would not appear on the ballot because he violated the new rule. 
Ford is arguing that he does not violate the rule since he voted in the June 9 primary and June 23 primary runoff. 
Ford had also been certified by the state Republican Party in the commissioner of agriculture race. 
Lawyers for the South Carolina Republican Party filed a response to Ford's lawsuit, insisting that Ford does not meet qualifications and stating that the party has the sole authority to certify its candidates. 
"South Carolina law gives the Party the sole authority and duty to ensure the qualifications of its candidates and to certify those qualified candidates to run in partisan primaries," the response stated. 
The South Carolina Republican Party has not responded to a Greenville News request for comment. 
Bella Carpentier covers the South Carolina legislature, state, and Greenville County politics. 
Contact her at bcarpentier@gannett.com 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.7%Bella Carpentier: 1.3%Greenville News: 1.1%Confirmation Bias11.7%This article: 7.6%Bella Carpentier: 0.5%Greenville News: 0.6%Anchoring Bias7.6%This article: 15.4%Bella Carpentier: 1.7%Greenville News: 1.4%Availability Heuristic15.4%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.3%Greenville News: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.9%Greenville News: 0.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Bella Carpentier: 1.6%Greenville News: 1.4%Framing Effect3.5%This article: 4.1%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 0.3%Loss Aversion4.1%This article: 5.1%Bella Carpentier: 0.6%Greenville News: 0.4%Status Quo Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.8%Greenville News: 1.9%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 0.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 13.0%Bella Carpentier: 1.4%Greenville News: 1.7%Negativity Bias13.0%This article: 6.2%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias6.2%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Bella Carpentier: 0.5%Greenville News: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias8.1%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.7%Greenville News: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.9%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 0.6%Recency Bias7.9%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 22.0%Bella Carpentier: 1.8%Greenville News: 1.5%Appeal to Authority22.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.7%Greenville News: 0.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 8.7%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.1%Circular Reasoning8.7%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 1.1%Greenville News: 1.2%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.1%Greenville News: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 2.3%Greenville News: 1.5%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.6%Greenville News: 0.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.4%Bella Carpentier: 0.3%Greenville News: 0.2%Burden of Proof5.4%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.9%Greenville News: 1.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.6%Greenville News: 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.1%Greenville News: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.1%Greenville News: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.7%Bella Carpentier: 0.5%Greenville News: 0.5%Unattributed Quote8.7%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.7%Greenville News: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.3%Greenville News: 0.5%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.0%Greenville News: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.4%Greenville News: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bella Carpentier: 0.2%Greenville News: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Bella Carpentier: 0.5%Greenville News: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.1%

369 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.7%attributed speech337writer words
100%flagged-word coverage
32 attributed words100% of attributed speech81% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%South Carolina Republican Party: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -1.2 ptsWriter: 1.2%South Carolina Republican Party: 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.