015 Re-elect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leader

[Erin]

15. The following appeared as a part of an advertisement for Adams, who is seeking reelection as governor.

“Re-elect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, seventy percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, five thousand new jobs have been created, and six corporations have located their headquarters here. Most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected. Adams’s opponent, Zebulon, would lead our state in the wrong direction, because Zebulon disagrees with many of Adams’s economic policies.”

[arjmen]

Originally Posted by Erin

15. The following appeared as a part of an advertisement for Adams, who is seeking reelection as governor.

“Re-elect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, seventy percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, five thousand new jobs have been created, and six corporations have located their headquarters here. Most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected. Adams’s opponent, Zebulon, would lead our state in the wrong direction, because Zebulon disagrees with many of Adams’s economic policies.”

The push for the re-election of Adams in the upcoming Gubernatorial elections is based on the argument that he offers the best leadership to the state’s economy. This argument is “supported” by two premises, namely–

1. Evidence – The past year has seen 70% of the state’s workers getting increased wages, the 5000 new jobs being created and 6 corporations locating their headquarters in the state.
2. Statistics – Most of the respondents in a recent poll suggested that the economy is likely to continue improving if Adams is re-elected.
The argument also attacks an opposing candidate - Zebulon - on Zebulon's disagreement with many of Adams's economic policies.
This writer is unconvinced by the above argument.

Firstly, the argument focuses entirely on only one facet of a Leadership’s policies – the economic policy. Concern about a state’s economy is all well and good, but there are other areas that are as important: Education, Health and Law Enforcement. Any argument that encourages the election of a candidate based only on his or her alleged strength in just one of these areas is flawed. The argument would have been better served had it also talked about Adams’s leadership potential in other areas of governance, especially the trio of Education, Health and Law Enforcement, that are of paramount importance to a state’s populace.

Secondly, the evidential premise used to support Adam’s strength in economic policy bears closer examination. While consistent growth of a state’s economy is a good indicator of a state government’s economic leadership potential, basing such judgement on one year’s results is foolhardy. A Governorship term runs for at least four years in most states, but there is no evidence provided here that shows Adams’s performance in the first three or more years after his claiming Governorship. Last year’s showing might have just been an upside to an improvement of the economy of the whole Nation and not due to Adams’s economic leadership. The argument would have been more convincing had it provided evidence of consistent economic improvement and growth during Adams’s term as Governor.

Thirdly, the statistical evidence provided commits the cardinal sin of not providing any data on the sample of the population that was involved in the poll. If the poll was only conducted on the people who have been life-long supporters of Adam’s and his party, then the statistic is utterly biased and provides no information on which to base an objective analysis. More data on the respondents to the poll (especially their variation and polling history) would have helped make this argument far more objective and perhaps more convincing.

Finally, the ad hominem attack on Adams’s opponent – Zebulon – is unnecessary (and rather childish) as it provides no information that helps someone objectively compare the two candidates. The statement in fact weakens the push for Adams’s re-election as it seems to suggest that there is no concrete reason to choose Adams over Zebulon. The argument would have been better served had it provided an objective comparison of the economic policies of the two candidates, instead of a baseless claim of superiority.

In conclusion, this writer feels that the argument for the re-election of Adams as Governor lacks objective validity and therefore is unconvincing.

[EasternM]

The following appeared as a part of an advertisement for Adams, who is seeking reelection as governor:

“Reelect Adams and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, 70 percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, 5,000 new jobs have been created, and
Six corporations have located their headquarters here. Most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected. Adams’s opponent, Zebulon, would lead our state
in the wrong direction, because Zebulon disagrees with many of Adams’s economic policies.”

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The argument presented is not convincing. The author have concluded that every one should vote the Adams as compare to Zebulon because the Adams economic polices have given a strong economy growth to state. There are several questionable assumptions resulting in logical gap between the premise and the conclusion.

The major assumption in this argument is that, Adams economic policies have successful result in all area in state. This assumption should be wrong because any politic decision resulting in only one area never make every one in state happy and resulting in winner of reelection. For example, In India, AP chief minister, Mr. Naidu economic policies resulted in making Hyderabad, a Computer hub in India which results in creating thousands of jobs but in next election Mr. Naidu lost the election due to not taking care of other state issue like farmer problem, Education, poor people and security.

The validation of conclusion also depends on providing that the all the job created in state is due to Adams policies, a key point omitted. For if this corporation, for example are move to state due to other resources like the raw material or shipping. For example, In the USA, Utah has crated hundreds of job due to mining not due to governor policies.

Finally, Even if the two assumptions discussed above were fact true, the argument would be unconvincing because without providing any further information the Adams policies will result in further increase in wages and job creation. For example, 5 year ago, Michigan was the well stables economical growth state but now even, Michigan governor had given lot promotion to state industry than also job are going out of state. The only reason is that, Michigan economy fully depends on auto industry. As the auto industry fall, the Michigan economy falls down.

In order to make conclusion more persuasive, the author would have to demonstrate that the assumption discussed above are in fact true. Thus evidence supporting that Adams policies are for all people in state, economy growth is due to Adams policies and there will be further growth in future would stronger the link between the premise and the conclusion. Without any discussion of these ideas, however, it is not possible to evaluate the conclusion.