Zack Mullock won. Get what Zack Mullock 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.
46 ads analyzed · 22 use a rhetorical technique, most often loaded language and glittering generalities.
The words doing the persuading
From the Mullock side · Paid for by Mullock for Congress Inc“…Unlike Van Drew, Zack Mullock takes no Corporate PAC funding. He will fight for us, not his Corporate Donors.
#southjersey
www.mullockforcongress.com”Loaded LanguageSee this ad →
From the Drew side · Paid for by Van Drew for Congress“…President!
Even worse, Mullock supports using OUR taxpayer dollars to give lawyers to criminal illegal immigrants who don’t want to be deported.
Mullock: Can’t trust him. Can’t afford him.”Loaded LanguageSee this ad →
Zack Mullock (Democrat) and Jeff Van Drew (Republican) are the nominees for New Jersey's 2nd congressional district in the November 3, 2026 general election. Jeff Van Drew is the incumbent. By their latest FEC reports, Zack Mullock's campaign had raised $961,000 (through October 14, 2026) and Jeff Van Drew's campaign $2.4 million (through October 14, 2026). Outside groups have reported $441,000 for Zack Mullock and $0 against; $486,000 for Jeff Van Drew and $1.5 million against. Semblen has analyzed 46 ads in this race; 22 used at least one rhetorical technique, most often loaded language and glittering generalities.
Zack Mullock (DEM), Jeff Van Drew (REP, incumbent).
3 others filed with the FEC; any ads they ran are below. 46 ads analyzed, 22 with at least one technique in the copy.
Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing. Updated 2026-10-27.
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 2026-10-27. Counts are of distinct ads; the same text run many times is one ad.
Ads analyzed
46 · started running between 2026-05-18 and 2026-10-26
$140,000–189,169 on all ads, $111,200–143,957 on flagged ads · Meta reports ranges; these are the sums of their ends
Example
“criminal illegal immigrants” — Loaded Language, paid for by Van Drew for Congress
· 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 Zack Mullock in office
Zack Mullock won. Get what Zack Mullock 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.
Each side is the campaign plus the groups backing it. How a group is placed is explained below the table.
Side
Ads
With at least one technique
Most common
Mullock (D)
34
12 of 34 (35%)
Loaded Language (9), Glittering Generalities (7), Exaggeration/Hyperbole (3)
Mullock's campaign
27
12 of 27 (44%)
Loaded Language (9), Glittering Generalities (7), Exaggeration/Hyperbole (3)
1 group backing Mullock
7
0 of 7
Drew (R)
12
10 of 12 (83%)
Loaded Language (8), Exaggeration/Hyperbole (6), Appeal to Fear (5)
All from the campaign; no ads here from groups placed on this side.
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.
48% of the 46 ads here use at least one of the techniques ticked below (22 ads).
Leaving out the softer ones (loaded language, glittering generalities, slogans, exaggeration, repetition): 28% of ads.
The words doing the work
The words that show up most in phrases our model flagged as loaded language or name calling in this race's ads, by number of ads.
RADICALin 3 ads· e.g. “CRAZY RADICAL”, “CRAZY RADICAL SOCIALISTS”
southin 3 ads· e.g. “trample all over the working families of South Jersey”, “is crushing South Jersey families”
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.
Zack Mullock (DEM)
Raised
$961K through 2026-10-14individuals $800K · PACs $49K · party $1,900 · candidate's own money, incl. loans $110K · cash on hand $105K
AB PAC— $252K supporting MullockLargest donors:
AB FOUNDATION $13.0M (30%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); DEMOCRACY MATTERS $5.6M (13%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); Deborah Simon $5.0M (11%), Retired; DEMOCRACY PAC $4.0M (9%); Lynn S Stern $1.0M (2%), Self Employed, PhotographerTHE TURNOUT PROJECT— $100K supporting MullockLargest donors:
GARDEN STATE FORWARD $1.0M (80%); GREATER NJ CARPENTERS PEC $250K (20%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC)VOICE OF THE ELECTORATE (VOTE)— $51K supporting MullockLargest donors:
Chris Kuenne $220K (100%), Rosemark, FounderWORKING AMERICA— $31K supporting Mullock
· 7 ads on this pageUNIDOSUS ACTION PAC— $3,000 supporting MullockLargest donors:
SEIU COPE (SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION) $165K (100%)and 3 more
Bundled through PACs
none reported · FEC bulk data of 2026-11-01
1 PAC gave directly — alphabetical; the legal limit is $5,000 per election
PROJECT 218— $1.2M opposing Drew, $485K supporting DrewLargest donors:
DEMOCRACY MATTERS $5.9M (50%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); Keith Behner $250K (2%), Retired; Amos Hostetter $250K (2%), Retired; James Millstein $250K (2%), Millstein & CO., Consultant; Samuel Walton $250K (2%), Restoration Works, ExecutiveINVEST IN TOMORROW COALITION PAC— $182K opposing DrewLargest donors:
Chris Larsen $6.0M (87%), Ripple Inc., Executive Chairman; Mark Mccall $200K (3%), Lime Rock NEW Energy, Managing Director; TRAJECTORY ENERGY HOLDINGS, LLC $100K (1%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); SUMMIT RIDGE ENERGY LLC $100K (1%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC)AMERICAN REPRESENTATIVE MAJORITY— $31K opposing DrewWORKING FAMILIES PARTY PAC— $20K opposing DrewLargest donors:
DEMOCRACY PAC $6.5M (32%); MOVEMENT VOTER PAC $2.2M (11%); ACCOUNTABLE JUSTICE ACTION FUND $2.0M (10%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC); Patty Ann Quillin $650K (3%), NOT Employed, NOT Employed; JORDAN/DELANEY FAMILY TRUST $450K (2%) (an organization: its own funders aren't reported to the FEC)BEFORE YOU VOTE INC.— $1,445 opposing Drewand 2 more
Paid for by Mullock for Congress Incfrom 2026-10-26spend $0–99100–999 impressions
As Mayor of Cape May I’m proud of our community and what we’ve accomplished by working together regardless of party to get the job done. We’ve been recognized as one of best communities in the country and we did all of these projects without raising taxes for 6 years. That took a lot of work and cooperation. That’s exactly what I’ll bring to DC.
#southjersey
no techniques found
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Paid for by Mullock for Congress Incfrom 2026-10-26spend $0–99100–999 impressions
AI & Data Centers cannot be allowed to continue to be unregulated and allowed to trample all over the working families of South Jersey. Common sense regulations must be put in place. It won’t happen with people who have been bought off. Vote for common sense, decency, and someone who truly cares about South Jersey. Vote Mullock!
#southjersey
Loaded Language: The emotive verb phrase 'trample all over' casts data centers as violent oppressors of ordinary people.
Appeal to Fear: It suggests a looming threat to working families if AI and data centers remain unregulated. Flagged: “cannot be allowed to continue to be unregulated”.
Glittering Generalities: 'Common sense' is a vague positive phrase that lends the proposal virtue without specifying what the regulations are.
Paid for by Van Drew for Congressfrom 2026-10-26spend $0–991,000–1,999 impressions
Zack Mullock is an “absolute liar and should be ashamed of himself for using my son for political gain." - Tony Kapurelos, Father of Patrolman Austin Kapurelos
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.
Zack Mullock won. Get what Zack Mullock 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 Mullock for Congress Incfrom 2026-10-26spend $0–99100–999 impressions
My opponent voted for:
The war that has spiked energy costs.
The tariffs that are crushing us at the grocery store
The cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and ACA subsidies that have doubled our health insurance premiums. And apparently he knows it's terrible policy because he can't even admit to the votes that he has taken!
End the BS!
no techniques found
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Paid for by Mullock for Congress Incfrom 2026-10-26spend $0–991,000–1,999 impressions
If you are worse off than you were 2 years ago because of the harmful policy choices coming out of Washington, I’m asking for your vote so we can make the American Dream a reality for folks here in Jersey.
no techniques found
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
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 NJ; or it ran mostly in NJ 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.