Steven Crowder Seethes Over Mamdani's Wins
Credibility score: 51/100 — Mixed Credibility. Several questionable claims detected. Watch with healthy skepticism.
BSmeter analyzed "Steven Crowder Seethes Over Mamdani's Wins" and rated it 51/100 for credibility (a BS score of 49/100 — mixed credibility), on 2026-05-18. Its weakest claim — "Some people (like MTG) claim Jewish people control the weather because they're angry." — scored 45/100 and was flagged as sketchy. 8 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 8 claims analyzed: 0 scored under 40, 8 between 40 and 69, and 0 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Crowder is interested in NYC budget; Right is 'desperate' for passion, citing Shapiro/Daily Wire decline. — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 0:00
He frames the whole thing as a desperate performance art piece. — The 'plummet' claim about Shapiro/DW is the only semi-fact here 🤔.
Why this score: Opinionated framing of political desperation. Key points:
- Crowder sets up his interest in the NYC budget (FY2026 was $115.9B, per web context).
- He asserts the Right is 'desperate' for passion.
- The specific claim about Ben Shapiro's numbers plummeting and Daily Wire going down by half needs verification, but it sets a strong narrative tone.
Original quote: “Steven Crowder weighing in on uh the New York City budget. >> Yeah, you've been waiting. >> I'm quite interested to see what Stephven Crowder thinks about this. What's amazing is the right is so desperate now to talk about anything that with any type of passion like you you know you you've seen um…”
Shapiro/DW numbers are dropping, but Crowder is supposedly safe financially. — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 0:30
They're setting the stage with doom and gloom! — But yeah, 'financially fine' after a half-drop? Bold claim. 😬📉
Why this score: The narrative is set on financial decline for Shapiro/DW while Crowder remains insulated. Key points: - Web context confirms DW staff cuts (half workforce mentioned). - Shapiro's views are down significantly (70-85% drop cited in web context). - The speaker implies Crowder is immune to this downturn.
Original quote: “Shapiro's numbers plummet
Daily Wire having to go uh down by half
sure Crowder still retains a lot of his
members so financially speaking I'm sure he's fine he never I wonder if they've started to trim their sales a little bit”
Some people (like MTG) claim Jewish people control the weather because they're angry. — Sketchy (45/100)
At 2:30
MTG is citing conspiracy theory as 'argument.' That’s not an argument; that’s a fever dream. 🚩💀 — The logic is weak.
Why this score: Conspiracy Theory Lite. This isn't even a scientific hypothesis; it's pure political grievance projected onto meteorology.
- It relies on the 'Jewish control everything' trope.
- It lacks any mechanism or evidence for *how* they are controlling the weather.
Original quote: “>> God was mad. >> God was mad. Or also uh there are folks like Marjorie Taylor Green obviously who think that maybe the Jews controlled the weather cuz they were upset”
Espero que suban impuestos a ricos; hubo reformas corporativas. — OK (65/100)
At 6:30
Esperando lo mejor, pero 'reformas' es muy vago. ¿Qué tipo de reformas? 🤔🤷♂️
Why this score: Opinionated hope for wealth taxation is present. The speaker mentions *some reforms* on corporate entities but doesn't specify the nature or scope of these changes.
Original quote: “Hopefully, they will come to raise taxes on wealthy people. There was some uh reforms, I think, on like um on uh corporate entities.”
NY State is in deficit, but they 'balanced' it by writing IOUs for big spending areas. — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 8:30
He basically said NY just swapped a hole for a fancy promissory note. 🙄💸 — 'Balancing' is such a generous term.
Why this score: Fiscal sleight of hand on display. The speaker implies the deficit isn't gone, it's just deferred via IOUs. This aligns with recent reports showing NY State has massive gaps, but NYC balancing often involves restructuring liabilities rather than pure revenue generation.
Original quote: “>> The entire rest of the state's in a deficit. Oh, more. Go ahead. We balanced the budget. You mean someone gave you money and you actually just decided that you'd write an IOU for one of your biggest line items? Okay, let's extol the virtues of socialism in New York City.”
Mamdani built his political career on a 'bed wedding' and is now feared for 'bouncing the budget'. — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 10:30
Soiling your undies over a politician? Classic. — But yeah, the soccer guy is definitely getting scrutinized.
Why this score: Opinion/Commentary. This sets up the entire narrative: Mamdani's perceived weakness (the 'bed wedding') versus his current political threat ('bouncing the budget'). The tone suggests Crowder views this as manufactured hype.
Original quote: “But to build an entire political project off of your uh bed wedding and you're soiling your undies because you're afraid of coming to New York. And now the latest thing that I'm scared of is the guy who's smiling all the time and playing soccer and doing scavenger hunts with the New Yorkers and…”
NYT made a good graph about taxing the rich. — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 12:30
They're already calling it 'good for them' before we even see the data. Classic bias check! 🙄📈
Why this score: Opinionated framing from the jump. The speaker is clearly setting up a critique of the NYT's narrative rather than just presenting facts about tax rates.
Original quote: “And as far as like um raising taxes on wealthy people, New York Times did this uh graph. Good for them.”
Tax rate percentages are more important than the actual dollars paid, as they show a higher effective tax burden. — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 14:30
He's right, but he's glossing over *why* the difference matters so much. 🙄📈
Why this score: Focus on Rates vs. Effective Rate. The speaker correctly distinguishes between the statutory tax rate and the effective tax rate. However, his commentary is a bit too simplistic; the relationship isn't always linear—loopholes can drastically widen that gap even if the base rates look high.
Original quote: “the percentage of taxes goes up in terms of what the uh tax rates were, not what the effective tax was because it was probably much lower, but still the tax rates It's a higher the effect of tax is going to be uh higher too.”
See the full analysis with timestamps →