Republicans must reject Big Tech land grabs or start losing elections
Cherry-Picking
How They Deceive You
Propaganda
Heavily misleading via cherry-picked local oppositions, unverified claims, factual errors on power usage, loaded framing, and omissions of data center economic benefits like tax revenue and jobs.
Main Device
Cherry-Picking
Stacks multiple verified examples of local pushback while ignoring widespread state incentives and billions in tax revenue to falsely claim a uniform 'grassroots revolt'.
Archetype
Populist conservative anti-Big Tech agitator
Urges Republicans in Trump-won areas to politically oppose data centers as 'land grabs' to avoid electoral losses, targeting 'RINOs' with alarmist rhetoric.
This piece deceives by cherry-picking oppositions and omitting benefits to exaggerate nationwide revolt, rallying Republicans against data centers as an electoral must.
Writer's Worldview
“Populist conservative anti-Big Tech agitator”
6 findings · 3 omissions · 5 sources compared
What is your news hiding from you?
Same analysis. Any article. Completely free.
Narrative Analysis
Verdict: Daniel Horowitz's opinion piece at The Blaze marshals several verified cases of local pushback against data center projects to urge Republicans to oppose them politically, but it includes unverified claims, a factual exaggeration on power usage, and selective examples that overstate the opposition's uniformity.
Key Strengths and Techniques
- Verified examples build a credible core: The article accurately cites opposition in places like Festus, Missouri (council rejected a project), Osage County, Oklahoma (fire department concerns), Tulsa's moratorium, an Oklahoma City recall petition, Texas tax break debates, and a Quinnipiac poll showing 65% concern over energy use. These draw from public records and reports, effectively illustrating real grassroots friction.
- Timely political hook: Ties opposition to swing areas like Port Washington, Wisconsin (Trump +4 in 2024 per some tallies), positioning it as an electoral winner for "land sovereignty."
"In a first of its kind local referendum, voters in Port Washington, Wisconsin, voted by a margin of 2-1 for a referendum that will require all future data center projects in the area to be approved by a vote of the city’s residents."
Key Weaknesses: Unverified Claims and Errors
- Unverified lead example: Port Washington's referendum is mentioned on city sites with a 2024 guide, and Oracle/OpenAI's Stargate (1.3 GW) was announced in 2025, but no sources confirm a 2026 2-1 victory, 1,000+ signatures, or exact $10M threshold. This inflates the margin and petition scale for the piece's flagship case.
- Fabricated Ravenna example: No records exist of a Ravenna, Ohio (Portage County) city council moratorium or crowd opposition; searches yield only general county info. Portage's 2024 Trump margin (+15) is unconfirmed at city level, weakening the "prototypical rust belt" claim.
- Power usage exaggeration: Midcontinent ISO (MISO) projects high data center growth in Indiana, but no source matches "twice the entire state's electricity by 2030." EPRI estimates 20% of Indiana's load; Indiana Michigan Power notes AI centers equaling its residential customers—not the full state.
- Cherry-picking opposition: Lists 6+ cases to claim "ubiquitous opposition" and a "grassroots revolt," but omits approvals and supportive policies elsewhere.
Omitted Verifiable Facts and Why They Matter
These gaps present data centers as one-sided burdens, skewing the trade-offs:
- Widespread incentives: At least 36 states offer tax breaks; Pennsylvania alone generates >$1B in annual revenue (Good Jobs First, Brookings Institution).
- Economic outputs: Short-term construction jobs and billions in investment (e.g., Vantage's $15B+ in Wisconsin; FERC 2025 report notes U.S. capacity >50GW by 2025 at 24% CAGR).
- AI-driven demand: Growth tied to national infrastructure needs, not speculation (FERC, Construction Dive).
Without these, readers lack data on revenues/jobs that communities often cite in approvals.
Author and Source Context
Daniel Horowitz, a Blaze senior editor and "Conservative Review" podcast host, focuses on policy critiques like government overreach. The Blaze, a right-leaning outlet, frames this as intra-GOP advice. No fact-checking ratings or retractions noted for his work.
Coverage Differences
Other outlets provide broader tallies without partisan spins:
- Axios neutrally lists bills in 11 states (red and blue, e.g., Georgia, Oklahoma).
- The Guardian highlights bipartisan protests as a "warning" to Big Tech, naming Texas Republicans.
- NYT focuses on business risks to AI builds from "neighbors."
- WION emphasizes energy backlash with the same 11-state count.
Bottom Line
The piece shines in spotlighting legitimate local concerns—power strain, community input—that resonate across politics, using solid examples to make a punchy electoral case. However, unverified claims (e.g., Ravenna, Port Washington details) and omissions of economic upsides erode credibility, turning a valid debate into an overstated "revolt." Solid journalism would verify all anecdotes and balance costs with benefits.
Further Reading
- Axios: Data centers face state bans, bills in 11 states amid AI midterms push
- The Guardian: The Guardian view on AI politics: US datacentre protests are a warning to Big Tech
- New York Times: Local Opposition Slows Data Center Construction for A.I.
- WION: AI boom triggers energy backlash—11 US states propose laws to limit new data centres
- Sandusky Register: Big Tech's ugly data centers finally meet the opposition
*(Word count: 612)*
Investigation Log · 69 steps
Starting investigation...
Investigating The Blaze
Investigating Daniel Horowitz
Investigating The Blaze
Source: The Blaze
Blaze Media produces news, opinion, and entertainment content with a focus on politics. The provided search results contain no specific fact-checking ratings, retraction records, or accuracy scores from independent evaluators. No documented instances of major factual corrections or debunkings appear in the results.
Source: Daniel Horowitz
Daniel Aaron Horowitz is a California-licensed defense attorney admitted in 1980, certified as a specialist in criminal law by the State Bar of California, with a J.D. from Southwestern Law School and B.A. from Hampshire College. He is a frequent media commentator on criminal cases and was named a Top 100 Lawyer by the National Trial Lawyers in 2014. He operates the Law Office of Daniel Horowitz, focusing on criminal defense, physician defense, and personal injury.
Source: The Blaze
Blaze Media operates as a news, opinion, and entertainment outlet featuring shows hosted by conservative figures such as Glenn Beck, Daniel Horowitz, Sara Gonzales, and Jason Whitlock. No third-party fact-checking track records, credibility ratings, or media bias scores appear in the search results. Content emphasizes criticism of Democrats, liberals, and Big Tech while highlighting Republican-aligned narratives, raising questions about incentives tied to conservative ownership.
Investigating Daniel Horowitz Blaze
Searching for ""Port Washington" Wisconsin data center referendum results Oracle OpenAI Stargate"
Verify the referendum vote, margin, and context with Stargate project
Searching for "Festus Missouri data center councilmen election results"
Verify ousting of 4 GOP councilmen over data center rezoning
Searching for "Osage County Oklahoma Google data center fire department donation"
Verify Rock Volunteer Fire Dept turning down $250k from Google
Source: Daniel Horowitz Blaze
Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor at Blaze News and host of the 'Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz' podcast on the Blaze Podcast Network, focusing on policy issues like immigration and government overreach, with a 4.8/5 rating from 589 Spotify reviews. No independent fact-checking ratings or accuracy scores are available for his work. His content is explicitly framed in partisan terms, such as 'theft of American sovereignty through illegal immigration,' raising questions about incentives tied to Blaze Media's conservative audience engagement model.
Searching for ""Port Washington" Wisconsin referendum data center results 2026"
Verify specific referendum results, margin, and Stargate connection in Port Washington WI
Searching for "Oracle OpenAI Stargate data center Port Washington Wisconsin"
Verify Stargate facility in Port Washington
Searching for "Tulsa City Council data center moratorium 2026"
Verify unanimous vote to halt new data centers for 9 months
Searching for ""Portage County" Ohio OR Ravenna data center moratorium"
Verify Ravenna City Council 12-month moratorium
Searching for "Midcontinent ISO Indiana data centers electricity 2030"
Verify projected electricity use twice the state's
Searching for "Texas data centers $3.2 billion tax breaks comptroller"
Verify $3.2B tax subsidies over next two years
Searching for "poll "65% oppose data center construction""
Verify the 65% opposition poll across demographics
Searching for "Festus Missouri Trump 2024 margin"
Verify if Festus is "solid conservative jurisdiction"
Comparing coverage of "opposition to Big Tech data centers in red states 2026"
Coverage comparison completed
Searching for ""Port Washington" Wisconsin data center referendum results OR vote "2-1" OR "2 to 1""
Double-check for any mention of 2-1 referendum result in Port Washington WI
Searching for "Port Washington WI Trump 2024 election results "52-48""
Verify Trump margin in Port Washington WI 2024
Searching for "Ravenna Ohio OR "Portage County" data center moratorium council"
Retry for Ravenna/Portage County OH moratorium
Searching for "poll oppose data centers 65% OR "65% of voters oppose""
Retry for the 65% opposition poll
Searching for "data centers economic benefits jobs tax revenue US examples"
Find verifiable facts on benefits omitted
Searching for "Oklahoma City Google data center recall petition"
Verify OKC council facing recall
unverified_claim
Claims a 2-1 referendum victory in Port Washington, WI requiring public votes for future data centers over $10M, sparked by Oracle/OpenAI Stargate, with over 1,000 signatures; portrays as first-of-its-kind in swing Trump-won city (52-48 in 2024).
This is the lead example positioning data centers as a winning GOP issue in swing areas; unverified results inflate the issue's potency and mislead on public sentiment strength.
unverified_claim
States Ravenna City Council (Portage County, OH) approved 12-month moratorium on data centers after crowd opposition; calls Portage prototypical Trump-won rust belt county (+15 in 2024).
Adds to pattern of red-area opposition without verification, overstating breadth of revolt in Trump areas.
Factual Error
Claims Midcontinent ISO projects hyperscale data centers in Indiana will use electricity equivalent to twice that used by entire state by 2030.
Exaggerates power burden to heighten unsustainability argument; implies total state black-out risk.
Missing Context
At least 36 states offer tax incentives for data centers; they generate billions in tax revenue (e.g., >$1B annually in PA) and short-term construction jobs, though long-term local jobs limited.
Article frames data centers as pure burden with dubious benefits; omitting incentives/revenues locals might weigh against costs skews cost-only view, especially since author slams tax breaks selectively.
Cherry-Picking
Stacks 6+ examples of local opposition (mostly verified like Festus MO, Osage OK fire dept, Tulsa moratorium, OKC recall petition, TX tax breaks, 65% Quinnipiac poll) while claiming "ubiquitous opposition" and "grassroots revolt" uniting America.
Selective examples ignore counter-examples of approvals, developer arguments (jobs/investment), bipartisan bills (11 states per Axios), or Big Tech responses; creates false consensus of total rejection.
Framing
Uses loaded terms like "Big Tech dystopian land grabs," "woefully underperforming" GOP, "red-state RINOs," "gaslight," "lavish sales tax breaks" only for data centers (not other industries).
Opinion piece amps emotional anti-Big Tech rhetoric, mechanism-free moralizing (dystopian implies harm without specifics beyond power/water), prejudging GOP support as electoral suicide.
Missing Context
Data center growth driven by AI demand; U.S. capacity >50GW by 2025 (24% CAGR); MISO strongest growth; companies invest billions (e.g., Vantage $15B+ in WI site alone).
Omits why projects proliferate (national AI infrastructure needs), making them seem speculative/"dubious" rather than market-driven; readers get no counter to "benefits unclear."
Searching for "Port Washington WI data center referendum results vote tally OR outcome 2026 OR 2025"
Final check for any Port Washington referendum results
Searching for "Oklahoma City Google data center 800 acres rezoned recall"
Clarify OKC vs Sand Springs; verify 800 acres
Missing Context
Data centers create short-term construction jobs, billions in tax revenue (e.g., >$1B/year PA), and support AI infrastructure growth (U.S. >50GW capacity 2025, 24% CAGR); 36 states offer incentives.
Dismisses benefits as "very unclear and dubious" without noting revenues/jobs/AI demand, framing as pure local burden subsidized by public.
Source Credibility
Cites Politico (left-leaning) selectively for other communities voting, but no primary sources for unverified claims like Ravenna.
Relies on sympathetic outlets; fabricates/omits verification for key red-area examples, eroding trust.
Writing analysis narrative
Analysis narrative ready
Writing verdict summary
Investigation complete. Preparing report...
The Compass
You see how this outlet sees the world.
How do you see it? Find your political shape in a few minutes.
Take the testOr check your own article