NPR · left

How will tariffs affect the midterms? In this Michigan border town, it's complicated

Open the full analysis → Read the original article at NPR →

Flags are about wording, sourcing and context, not whether it’s true or which side is right. How we check

Wording

9%of the article’s sentences use a rhetorical technique

Tap a technique to see where it’s used.

What these techniques mean

False Equivalence Show the first one ↓

Loaded Language Emotionally charged words that push a reaction instead of giving information.Show the first one ↓

Name Calling A label used to mock or discredit instead of an argument.Show the first one ↓

Black-and-White Fallacy Two options presented as the only ones, when there are more.Show the first one ↓

Exaggeration/Hyperbole Overstating something to make it seem bigger or worse.Show the first one ↓

ClaimsCheck the factual claims in this article →

What the model flagged

underlined: technique found; pick one to highlight its words tap a technique for why

↓

False EquivalenceWhy ›

Artificial moral balance drawn between actions that aren't comparable.

“hijacked”

↓

Loaded Language · “hijacked”Why ›

The word 'hijacked' is emotionally charged, implying a violent or illegitimate takeover of the Democratic Party.

“far left”

↓

Name Calling · “far left”Why ›

The label 'far left' is a derogatory political label used to discredit a faction rather than describe their positions substantively.

“What did the Democrats have to offer me, other than Orange Man bad”

↓

Black-and-White Fallacy · “What did the Democrats have to offer me, other than Orange Man bad”Why ›

The sentence implies the Democrats had nothing to offer beyond opposition to Trump, presenting a binary where the only Democratic message was anti-Trump sentiment with no other substance.

“That's all they could say last time”

↑

Exaggeration/Hyperbole · “That's all they could say last time”Why ›

The claim that 'that's all they could say' is an absolute overstatement dismissing the entirety of Democratic messaging as a single talking point.

Read the original ↗ · Open the full analysis →

↑ Back to the results

Analyzed 2026-09-03 04:00 UTC. Articles are sometimes updated after publication — if a quote here isn't in the current version, the piece has changed since.

Analyzed automatically with Semblen's fine-tuned model. These are rhetorical techniques, not political tilt — and finding one is not a claim that the article is false. Findings include language the outlet is quoting rather than asserting: we flag techniques wherever they appear, so check each quote against the original. The model has known false positives on strong-but-legitimate language, so treat each finding as a prompt to read closely, not a verdict. How articles are chosen →