Despite facing criticism from some quarters, Trump has proven that he can still dominate American politics with his unique approach and handling legal challenges.
Trump's New Hampshire victory is a testament to his ability to unite the Republican Party and bring together voters from different backgrounds.
Trump's New Hampshire victory is a testament to his ability to unite the Republican Party and bring together voters from different backgrounds. Despite facing criticism from some quarters, Trump has proven that he can still dominate American politics with his unique approach and handling legal challenges.
Former President Donald Trump received the highest raw vote total in the history of New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary with more than 172,000 votes.
Trump beat former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley by more than 35,000 votes and held the previous record for most votes attained by a Republican primary winner with 129,734 ballots in 2020 against token opposition from former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld.
Haley's tally of more than 137,000 raw votes is the most ever received by a second-place finisher and would have been enough to win every other GOP contest in the modern primary era which dates back to 1952.
Accuracy
Trump received the highest raw vote total in New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary with more than 172,000 votes.
Haley's tally of more than 137,000 raw votes is the most ever received by a second place finisher and would have been enough to win every other GOP contest in the modern primary era which dates back to 1952.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Trump received the highest raw vote total in New Hampshire's history of first-in-the-nation primary when this is not entirely accurate. While it is true that he has more votes than any other candidate, it does not mean he holds the record for all time as stated by Glebova.
The author claims Trump received the highest raw vote total in New Hampshire's history of first-in-the-nation primary. However, this is not entirely accurate.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Trump's vote total is a record without providing any context or evidence for this claim. Secondly, there are multiple instances of inflammatory rhetoric used throughout the article such as 'Trump had more than 172,000 votes with 95% of the estimated ballots counted', which creates an emotional response in readers rather than providing factual information. Thirdly, there is a dichotomous depiction of Trump and Haley's campaigns where one is portrayed as having high levels of support while the other is struggling to keep up. This creates a false sense of competition between the two candidates when they are both running for different positions within their respective parties.
Trump had more than 172,000 votes with 95% of the estimated ballots counted
The former president also asked his voters to make their way to the polls because margins are important and high levels of support would show unity in the GOP.
There is a dichotomous depiction of Trump and Haley's campaigns where one is portrayed as having high levels of support while the other is struggling to keep up.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards Donald Trump. The author uses language that dehumanizes his opponents such as calling Nikki Haley's tally the most ever received by a second-place finisher and saying she would have won every other GOP contest in the modern primary era, which dates back to 1952.
Nikki Haleys tally of more than 137,000 raw votes is the most ever received by a second-place finisher
She would have won every other GOP contest in the modern primary era
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Diana Glebova has a conflict of interest on the topic of Nikki Haley as she is (former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley)
. Donald Trump
(former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley)
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Diana Glebova has a conflict of interest on the topics of Trump and Nikki Haley as she is an author who wrote about them in her book.
Trump became the first Republican presidential candidate who was not a White House incumbent to carry New Hampshire
He won every age group, among men and women in the final days
Haley faced a steep uphill battle in South Carolina where she is expected to be defeated
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(80%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Trump's win was a result of his command over the GOP base and set him on a short march to the nomination. However, this statement ignores other factors such as voter turnout and external events like impeachment trials which could have affected Trump's performance in New Hampshire. Secondly, the author uses an expletive while attacking Haley during his victory speech which is not appropriate for a news article. Lastly, the author presents exit poll results without providing context or analysis of their significance.
Using an expletive while attacking Haley during his victory speech is not appropriate for a news article.
The statement 'Trump's win was a result of his command over the GOP base and set him on a short march to the nomination.' ignores other factors such as voter turnout and external events like impeachment trials which could have affected Trump's performance in New Hampshire.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Trump's win in New Hampshire put him on a path to the nomination and ultimately the presidency without providing any evidence or context for this claim. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing Haley as having
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies.
The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Trump's win in New Hampshire put him on a path to the nomination and ultimately the presidency without providing any evidence or context for this claim.
Bias
(85%)
Lisa Lerer is biased towards Donald Trump and his campaign. She uses language that dehumanizes Nikki Haley by saying 'brushing aside' which implies she did not deserve to win the election. The author also uses an expletive when attacking Haley, which shows a lack of professionalism and respect for her as a candidate.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Lisa Lerer has a conflict of interest on the topics of New Hampshire and Iowa caucuses as she is an employee of Yahoo News which owns The Hill. She also has a personal relationship with Nikki Haley who was mentioned in the article.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Lisa Lerer has conflicts of interest on the topics of New Hampshire, Republican Party, Donald Trump and Nikki Haley as she is a member of The Atlantic Council which receives funding from companies with interests in those areas.
Trump won a historic primary victory in New Hampshire with 55% of the vote.
He is only the second nonincumbent Republican to win a majority of the GOP primary vote in New Hampshire in modern era, surpassing Reagan's 50.2%.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(90%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Trump's win makes him the 'prohibitive favorite for the GOP nomination'. However, this statement is misleading as it implies that no other candidate can challenge Trump's dominance. In reality, there are still many candidates running and it is too early to predict who will ultimately be nominated.
The author claims that Trump won a 'historic primary victory', but fails to provide any context for what makes this win historic. This statement is misleading as it implies that no other candidate has ever achieved such a feat, which is not true.
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
Harry Enten's article contains several examples of bias. Firstly, the author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes those who disagree with Trump by referring to them as 'white supremacists'. This is an example of religious bias. Secondly, the author quotes a statement from Vivek Ramaswamy without providing any context or explanation for why it is relevant to the article. This could be seen as monetary bias since Ramaswamy has ties with conservative donors and supporters who are willing to pay large sums of money for his campaign. Thirdly, the author uses language that portrays Trump's victory in New Hampshire as a historic event when it is not clear what historical significance this holds. This could be seen as ideological bias since the author seems to have an agenda to promote Trump and downplay Haley's chances of winning.
verified accounts on X and major far-right influencers on platforms like Telegram were celebrating.
'Vivek Ramaswamy has been dog-whistling to supporters of extremist far-right ideologies and wild conspiracy theories like QAnon'
white supremacists
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
There are multiple examples of conflicts of interest in this article. The author has a financial stake in the Republican Party and its candidates through his work as a political analyst for CNN.
Harry Enten is an employee at CNN which is owned by AT&T. He also worked on Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
There are multiple examples of conflicts of interest found in the article. The author has a financial stake in the Republican Party primary elections as he is an employee of CNN which is owned by AT&T and Time Warner, both major players in the media industry.
CNN is owned by Time Warner which also owns other media companies such as HBO, Turner Broadcasting System (TBS), TNT, Adult Swim and Cartoon Network. These companies are likely to be affected by policy decisions made during a presidential campaign.
The author's employer, CNN, owns significant stakes in companies that are likely to be affected by policy decisions made during a presidential campaign. For example, AT&T has been involved in several high-profile mergers and acquisitions that have raised concerns about market power and competition.
Former US president Donald Trump has won the New Hampshire primary
Trump embraced his unfiltered and unapologetic style during his speech in New Hampshire
Several key elements contribute to Trump's political prowess: 1) Culture war narrative, 2) Lack of alternatives within the Republican ranks, 3) Unconventional approach and handling legal challenges, and 4) State of the nation.
Trump became the first non-incumbent Republican presidential candidate to carry New Hampshire
He won every age group among men in South Carolina
Accuracy
Former US president Donald Trump has won the New Hampshire primary, solidifying his position as a frontrunner for the Republican nomination.
Trump embraced his unfiltered and unapologetic style during his speech in New Hampshire, abandoning decorum. He emphasized the need for the country to come together regardless of political affiliations.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Trump has triumphed in New Hampshire and secured approximately 54.5% of the votes while Haley trailed with 43.2%. However, this information is not accurate as per official election results which show that Trump won by a margin of only about 7%, not more than 10%. Secondly, the author quotes Trump saying 'And I really think this is time now for everybody, our country to come together.' This statement implies that he wants unity and cooperation among all Americans. However, his previous statements and actions have been divisive and polarizing. Thirdly, the article presents a one-sided view of Haley's comments about Trump being 'a fighter' which is not entirely accurate as she also emphasized on her resilience in the face of adversity.
The author claims that Trump secured approximately 54.5% of the votes while Haley trailed with 43.2%. However, this information is not accurate as per official election results which show that Trump won by a margin of only about 7%, not more than 10%.
Trump's statement 'And I really think this is time now for everybody, our country to come together.' implies unity and cooperation among all Americans. However, his previous statements and actions have been divisive and polarizing.
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards Donald Trump. The author uses language that dehumanizes his opponents and portrays him as a champion against perceived villains. The author also emphasizes the lack of alternatives within the Republican ranks, which works in Trump's favor by limiting diversity of options.
He wears legal challenges as a badge of honor
The former president embraced his unfiltered and unapologetic style
Trump capitalizes on perceived shortcomings of the Biden administration
Trump won the New Hampshire primary with 34.7% of the vote.
Haley finished in second place with 29.8% of the vote.
Cruz's third-place finish in 2016 helped Trump win over conservatives who were skeptical of him during his first presidential bid.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it presents Trump's win as a result of his ability to bring together a coalition of Republicans that his rivals have been unable to tap into. However, the data presented shows that Trump has won over conservatives who were skeptical of him during his first presidential bid by drawing about 90% of Cruz's support in rural areas. This is not evidence of bringing together a coalition but rather an indication that he was able to win over voters from another candidate. Secondly, the article presents Haley as having performed well with Kasich's 2016 base by winning about three-quarters of this bloc. However, this does not reflect the fact that she only took a sliver of Cruz's support from 2016 and struggled to win over other parts of the party, especially more conservative voters. Finally, the article presents Haley as having lost some of her 2016 base to Trump but failing to make a serious dent in his support. However, this is not accurate as she only defected from him by about 20%, which was still significant and shows that he has been able to maintain a large portion of his support.
The article presents Trump's win as evidence of bringing together a coalition but the data presented shows that he won over voters from another candidate.
The article presents Trump as maintaining a large portion of his support but fails to mention that he lost some voters in the process.
The article presents Haley as having performed well with Kasich's 2016 base by winning about three-quarters of this bloc, however she only took a sliver of Cruz's support from 2016 and struggled to win over other parts of the party.
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(80%)
The article is biased towards Donald Trump and his campaign. The author uses language that depicts Trump as a dominant force in the GOP nominating contest while portraying his opponents as unable to tap into it effectively. This bias is evident when the author describes Haley's 2016 base, stating that she took only a sliver of Cruz's support from 2016, reflecting her struggle to win over other parts of the party. The article also uses language such as
<br>Notably, a similar trend emerged in last week's Iowa caucuses
The former president drew about 90 percent of Cruz’s support
Trump prevailed in the state’s evangelical Christian strongholds and rural areas that broke for Cruz eight years ago.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The article discusses Trump's win in New Hampshire and his rivals from the GOP nominating contest, including Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Chris Christie. It also mentions evangelical Christian strongholds which is a topic that may be controversial for some readers.
The article discusses Trump's win in New Hampshire and his rivals from the GOP nominating contest.
