Greg Stanton won. Get what Greg Stanton says in office by email, analyzed for rhetorical techniques, once sworn in. And an email if the result changes: a recount or a call reversed. One-click unsubscribe.
Confirming also makes your free Semblen account, with a 14-day Pro trial. No card.
17 ads analyzed · 13 use a rhetorical technique, most often glittering generalities and loaded language.
The words doing the persuading
From the Jasser side · Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasser“…veteran, and patriot ready to diagnose & fix our broken healthcare system. He’ll bring a doctor’s discipline and a veteran’s courage to Congress.
Vote Dr. Zuhdi Jasser for AZ-04!
Learn more at Z4AZ.com.”Glittering GeneralitiesSee this ad →
From the Stanton side · Paid for by Think Big“👏 As a proven champion for Arizona families, Greg Stanton has worked to lower everyday costs, protect Social Security, and expand…”Glittering GeneralitiesSee this ad →
Zuhdi Jasser (Republican) and Greg Stanton (Democrat) are the nominees for Arizona's 4th congressional district in the November 3, 2026 general election. Greg Stanton is the incumbent. By their latest FEC reports, Zuhdi Jasser's campaign had raised $744,000 (through October 14, 2026) and Greg Stanton's campaign $2.7 million (through October 14, 2026). Outside groups have reported $18,000 for Zuhdi Jasser and $9,000 against; $759,000 for Greg Stanton and $75,000 against. Semblen has analyzed 17 ads in this race; 13 used at least one rhetorical technique, most often glittering generalities and loaded language.
Zuhdi Jasser (REP), Greg Stanton (DEM, incumbent).
3 others filed with the FEC; any ads they ran are below. 17 ads analyzed, 13 with at least one technique in the copy.
Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing. Updated 2026-10-29. 1 ad from other advertisers shown separately below.
Anyone can vote by mail; request a ballot by Fri, Oct 23 (Request ballot-by-mail by this date (11 days before Election Day)) (passed)Source: azsos.gov ↗Source: azsos.gov ↗
Election Day
Tue, Nov 3 (passed)
ID at the polls
One photo ID with name and address, or two non-photo documents (List #2 or 3)Source: azsos.gov ↗
Checked October 8, 2026. Rules can change; confirm with the official site before you go.
Something wrong or out of date? Tell us
A person reads every report and fixes errors the same day.
Got a political text?
Paste a campaign text message you’ve received. Semblen marks the persuasion techniques in its wording and lists the factual claims it makes. Take your name out first: what you paste is analyzed and kept like any text.
Findings
As of 2026-10-26. Counts are of distinct ads; the same text run many times is one ad.
Ads analyzed
17 · started running between 2026-08-26 and 2026-10-24
$16,900–24,943 on all ads, $15,700–22,753 on flagged ads · Meta reports ranges; these are the sums of their ends
Example
“a doctor’s discipline and a veteran’s courage” — Glittering Generalities, paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasser
· the flagged ad with the highest reported spend that shows the most common technique
A small box with these findings and the newest ads, updated as new ads are analyzed. Free for newsrooms, blogs and campaigns alike; it links back here.
Follow Greg Stanton in office
Greg Stanton won. Get what Greg Stanton says in office by email, analyzed for rhetorical techniques, once sworn in. And an email if the result changes: a recount or a call reversed. One-click unsubscribe.
Confirming also makes your free Semblen account, with a 14-day Pro trial. No card.
All from 2 groups backing Stanton; none from the campaign itself.
Not placed on a side (2 sponsors)
4
2 of 4
Name Calling (2), Glittering Generalities (1)
Read this before comparing the sides. Ads that attack an opponent use these techniques far more often than ads that introduce a candidate, whoever runs them, so the side running more attack ads shows a higher share. A technique is about wording, not about whether an ad is true. These are online ads only (Meta and YouTube), not television.
How a group is placed: by its own filings with the Federal Election Commission. A group is with a candidate when it reported spending to support that candidate, or to oppose the other one in the general election. The parties' own committees are with their nominee. Spending against a candidate in a primary places a group nowhere, and neither does our reading of its ads: a group with no such filing is listed as not placed. The sponsor table gives the reason for each.
Decide what counts
Not everyone would call every technique a problem. Untick the ones you'd call ordinary persuasion and the count updates.
76% of the 17 ads here use at least one of the techniques ticked below (13 ads).
Leaving out the softer ones (loaded language, glittering generalities, slogans, exaggeration, repetition): 41% of ads.
Semblen is free to read and has no ads. If this page was useful, you can support it.
Money in this race
From FEC filings for 2025–26. Outside spending is money a group spends on its own about a candidate — TV and online ads, mail, canvassing. It is not a donation to the campaign, and the candidate does not control it. Supporting means it was spent to help that candidate win; Opposing means it was spent to defeat them, usually on attack ads. Groups report it within 24 or 48 hours as the election nears. Raised is the campaign's own fundraising, as of its latest quarterly report. Largest donors come from each outside spender's own FEC receipts, with each donor's share of its itemized receipts; donors under $100,000 are not named. People are shown with the employer and occupation they reported. A donor that is itself a political committee is shown with its own largest donors. Companies and nonprofits don't report their funders to the FEC, so the trail ends there, and the page says so.
Zuhdi Jasser (REP)
Raised
$744K through 2026-10-14individuals $727K · PACs $7,500 · candidate's own money, incl. loans $10K · cash on hand $90K
THINK BIG— $592K supporting Stanton
· 2 ads on this pageLargest donors:
LEADING THE FUTURE $22.5M (98%); Ronald Conway $500K (2%), SV Angel, FounderPROTECT PROGRESS— $158K supporting StantonLargest donors:
FAIRSHAKE $33.0M (>99%) (its largest donors: RIPPLE LABS INC. $48.0M, an organization; COINBASE $25.0M, an organization; COINBASE COMMERCE (EXCHANGE) $8.2M, an organization); RIPPLE LABS INC. $250K (1%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC)AZ4 DESERVES MORE— $75K opposing StantonBUILDING TOGETHER— $8,910 supporting StantonGIVEGREEN UNITED ACTION— $90 supporting StantonLargest donors:
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS, INC. $946K (40%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); NRDC ACTION FUND INC. $922K (39%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); LCV VICTORY FUND $500K (21%)and 1 more
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-10-24spend $400–49925,000–29,999 impressions
🚨NEW AD: LIFELONG DEMOCRAT ENDORSES OUR CAMPAIGN!
Jane Lowery is crossing party lines because she's tired of the same old Washington politics.
It's time for common sense, independent leadership, and RESULTS over party politics.
Greg Stanton answers to his party. I answer to ARIZONA. #AZ04 🇺🇸
WATCH👇
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfKEBytq7S8
Quotes language that uses Name Calling. · not counted
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-10-133 variantsspend $1,700–2,39785,000–96,997 impressions
Where is Greg Stanton when Arizona families needed him most?
During COVID, while Arizona families were shoved into isolation, Greg Stanton was casting congressional votes from a boat in Utah.
Seven years in Congress and he has only ONE bill to show for it. Now, with families struggling to afford groceries, housing, and everyday expenses, Stanton is fighting back against the tax relief and new deductions that could help them keep more of what they earn.
Absent when it matters. Ineffective when he's there.
WATCH👇
Loaded Language: The rhetorical question implies abandonment and betrayal of families in their hour of need through an emotionally charged framing. Flagged: “when Arizona families needed him most”.
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-10-133 variantsspend $300–59712,000–14,997 impressions
I've spent my life solving problems, not talking about them. Now I'm bringing that fight to Washington.
My opponent, career politician Greg Stanton, has voted in lockstep with his party for 7 years and has ONE bill of his own to show for it. He's spent his career appeasing DC Democrats with no regard for how it hurts Arizonans.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
I'm not interested in party lines. I know how to solve a problem, and I'll work with anyone to deliver for this district.
WATCH👇
Name Calling: Labels the opponent a 'career politician' to discredit him rather than address his record on the merits.
Card Stacking: Selectively presents the count of one sponsored bill and party-line voting to imply ineffectiveness, omitting other legislative work or context. Flagged: “has ONE bill of his own to show for it”.
Loaded Language: Emotionally charged framing of 'appeasing' and 'no regard for how it hurts' casts the opponent as harming constituents.
Greg Stanton won. Get what Greg Stanton says in office by email, analyzed for rhetorical techniques, once sworn in. And an email if the result changes: a recount or a call reversed. One-click unsubscribe.
Confirming also makes your free Semblen account, with a 14-day Pro trial. No card.
Paid for by Think Bigfrom 2026-09-258 variantsspend $1,600–2,392351,000–412,992 impressions
👏 As a proven champion for Arizona families, Greg Stanton has worked to lower everyday costs, protect Social Security, and expand pathways to good-paying jobs across Arizona. That ’s who we need in Congress!
Paid for by Think Bigfrom 2026-09-254 variantsspend $600–996124,100–155,996 impressions
Greg Stanton knows Arizona families need leaders who deliver real results. As mayor of Phoenix and in Congress, he has fought to cut costs, create good paying jobs, and help working families get ahead.
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-09-183 variantsspend $400–69714,000–16,997 impressions
America is facing a growing threat of extremist ideologies from socialism to Islamism. Dr. Zuhdi Jasser has spent his life confronting radicalism and defending our country. In Congress, he’ll fight for the values that make America great and safeguard our nation from political extremes on both sides of the aisle.
Learn more about Dr. Jasser’s campaign at Z4AZ.com.
Appeal to Fear: Frames the country as facing a growing threat from extremist ideologies to provoke anxiety. Flagged: “America is facing a growing threat of extremist ideologies”.
Loaded Language: Uses emotionally charged labels like 'extremist' and 'threat' to color the ideologies named.
Name Calling: Labels socialism and Islamism as extremist ideologies to discredit them without argument. Flagged: “extremist ideologies from socialism to Islamism”.
Glittering Generalities: Invokes vague positive values without specifics. Flagged: “the values that make America great”.
False Equivalence: Equates political extremes 'on both sides of the aisle' as comparable threats.
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-09-189 variantsspend $3,000–4,291111,000–139,991 impressions
Greg Stanton is just wrong for Arizona.
❌ Rubber-stamped trillions in spending under the Biden administration
❌ Opposed border security measures
❌ Backed one of the largest tax hikes in American history
❌ Voted to tax your tips and overtime pay
AZ-04 deserves better. Send Dr. Zuhdi Jasser to Congress. Learn more at Z4AZ.com.
Loaded Language: 'Rubber-stamped' is a pejorative term implying mindless approval rather than describing the votes factually.
Card Stacking: Presents a one-sided list of accusations as a checklist of failures, omitting context, such as the content of the measures or reasons for the votes. Flagged: “❌ Opposed border security measures”.
Exaggeration/Hyperbole: Sweeping superlative framing of a tax measure as among the largest in history, with no supporting evidence. Flagged: “one of the largest tax hikes in American history”.
Appeal to Fear: Frames the votes as a direct threat to the audience's personal income, using 'your' to provoke anxiety. Flagged: “Voted to tax your tips and overtime pay”.
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-09-183 variantsspend $5,500–6,997260,000–304,997 impressions
Arizona needs a doctor in the U.S. House.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser is a physician of 25+ years, Navy veteran, and patriot ready to diagnose & fix our broken healthcare system. He’ll bring a doctor’s discipline and a veteran’s courage to Congress.
Vote Dr. Zuhdi Jasser for AZ-04!
Learn more at Z4AZ.com.
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-09-183 variantsspend $1,500–2,19754,000–64,997 impressions
America is strongest when we remember what unites us. Our nation is a people, bound together by faith, freedom, and opportunity.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser is running for Congress to restore that shared American identity, strengthen our resolve, and keep the American Dream alive. If we want a future where our kids can afford a home, live in safe communities, and thrive in the greatest nation on earth, we must fight for it together.
Join Team Jasser and help us protect America’s promise: Z4AZ.com
Glittering Generalities: Vague, uplifting claim about national strength and unity with no concrete content. Flagged: “America is strongest when we remember what unites us.”.
Exaggeration/Hyperbole: Uses an absolute superlative claim about the country that cannot be substantiated. Flagged: “the greatest nation on earth”.
Paid for by Friends of Dr. Jasserfrom 2026-09-183 variantsspend $800–1,09724,000–30,997 impressions
Arizona families deserve a shot at the American Dream.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser is running for Congress in AZ-04 to ensure families can buy a home, afford groceries, raise their children safely, and build a future rooted in American opportunity.
Zuhdi will put you and your family first.
Learn more at Z4AZ.com.
Glittering Generalities: Vague, positive-sounding promises about opportunity and a better future with no specific policy content. Flagged: “build a future rooted in American opportunity”.
Paid posts that ran in AZ and name a candidate, from advertisers that aren't part of this race: news-style pages, campaigns for other offices, and others. They're shown here for completeness and not counted with the ads above. We show the same technique analysis; their claims are not checked.
Grand Canyon Gazette: news-style page
Paid for by Grand Canyon Gazettefrom 2026-10-262 variantsspend $0–198200–1,998 impressions
Reps. Greg Stanton, Yassamin Ansari, and Adelita Grijalva said federal authorities notified them that suspicious letters had been sent to their Arizona offices. The letter addressed to Stanton’s Mesa office was intercepted before delivery, while the letters intended for Ansari and Grijalva were sent to former office addresses they no longer use.
The FBI and U.S. Postal Inspection Service are investigating the letters, which come days after an envelope containing white powder prompted an evacuation at Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes’ office. Authorities determined that the powder in Fontes’ envelope was non-toxic, while investigators continue to examine the separate mail incidents and whether any further action is necessary.
An ad is on this page because its own "Paid for by" line is a campaign in this race; or it comes from a national Senate group and ran mostly in AZ; or it ran mostly in AZ and names a candidate — unless its sponsor is a campaign for some other office. Ads from outside groups appear alongside the campaigns' own.
Campaigns run one text as many separate ads. Identical text from the same sponsor is one card here, marked with its number of variants.
A technique is a specific rhetorical move in the wording, found by our model and explained in one line. It is not a claim that the ad is false.
Claims are checked when a reader asks: press "Check this ad's claims" on a card. Running a check and seeing its verdicts are part of Semblen Pro, because each check costs money to run; anyone can see which claims an ad makes. The ten ads with the most money behind them in each race are checked ahead of time.
Claim verdicts say what the cited sources say. A verdict that an ad is wrong or misleading is shown only when it cites an established fact-checker or an institutional record — Congress, a federal agency, a court — and its confidence is not low; a weaker one is not shown at all. Each verdict shows what it rests on and how confident it is. If we got one wrong, press Disagree: a verdict that readers dispute and no one defends comes down.
Video ads come from the campaigns' own YouTube channels; the transcript is analyzed. Meta ads are analyzed on their text; their video and images are not, yet.