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 author in his statement provides an argument in favour of re-electing Adams in the upcoming state elections. He mentions some of the positive changes the state has experienced during the tenure of Adams. He highlights the increase in wages, new offices of corporations and a poll survey in favour of Adams. Though his argument may well have merit, the argument is poorly reasoned, with questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence provided by the author, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
Primarily, the argument tries to portray that Adams has been instrumental in improving the state’s economy, but there is no tangible evidence provided in support of the argument, the author only talks about the last year of Adams’s tenure. The author mentions that seventy percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, but does not provide the amount/percent by which the wages have increased. The increase may well be 1%, which might even be less than the inflation rate, hence practically the wages have decreased. The argument also fails to provide correlation between Adams’s policies and the wage increase.
In addition the argument also fails to provide any statistical data about the impact the relocation of headquarters of six corporations has had on the state’s economy. The corporations might be small ones and that would not be significant for a state. The argument mentions the creation of five thousand new jobs, but does not provide any data about the nature of those jobs or what positive impact did those jobs have on the state’s economy. It might be possible that those five thousand new jobs might have been created after scrapping ten thousand old ones. So this assumption is also based on incomplete and flawed logic.
The author also assumes that only Adams’s is good for the state and since Zebulon is Adams’s opponent his policies will necessarily take the state in the wrong direction. The argument provides no evidence of Zebulon’s policies being flawed or wrong for the state.The author also mentions a poll where most of the respondents polled in favour of Adams, but provides no data provides
While the author does have several issues in his argument’s premises and assumptions, that is not to say his argument is without base. He could have strengthened his argument by providing statistical data about increment in wages, the nature of the new jobs created, data about previous year of Adams’s governance, and some examples of Zebulon’s flawed policies.
In sum, the author’s argument is based on unsupported premises and assumptions, and the logic is also flawed.Enough statistical data is not provided to support the claims the argument makes in favour of Adams. The above issues render the author’s conclusion invalid.
“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 author in his statement provides an argument in favour of re-electing Adams in the upcoming state elections. He mentions some of the positive changes the state has experienced during the tenure of Adams. He highlights the increase in wages, new offices of corporations and a poll survey in favour of Adams. Though his argument may well have merit, the argument is poorly reasoned, with questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence provided by the author, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
Primarily, the argument tries to portray that Adams has been instrumental in improving the state’s economy, but there is no tangible evidence provided in support of the argument, the author only talks about the last year of Adams’s tenure. The author mentions that seventy percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, but does not provide the amount/percent by which the wages have increased. The increase may well be 1%, which might even be less than the inflation rate, hence practically the wages have decreased. The argument also fails to provide correlation between Adams’s policies and the wage increase.
In addition the argument also fails to provide any statistical data about the impact the relocation of headquarters of six corporations has had on the state’s economy. The corporations might be small ones and that would not be significant for a state. The argument mentions the creation of five thousand new jobs, but does not provide any data about the nature of those jobs or what positive impact did those jobs have on the state’s economy. It might be possible that those five thousand new jobs might have been created after scrapping ten thousand old ones. So this assumption is also based on incomplete and flawed logic.
The author also assumes that only Adams’s is good for the state and since Zebulon is Adams’s opponent his policies will necessarily take the state in the wrong direction. The argument provides no evidence of Zebulon’s policies being flawed or wrong for the state.The author also mentions a poll where most of the respondents polled in favour of Adams, but provides no data provides
While the author does have several issues in his argument’s premises and assumptions, that is not to say his argument is without base. He could have strengthened his argument by providing statistical data about increment in wages, the nature of the new jobs created, data about previous year of Adams’s governance, and some examples of Zebulon’s flawed policies.
In sum, the author’s argument is based on unsupported premises and assumptions, and the logic is also flawed.Enough statistical data is not provided to support the claims the argument makes in favour of Adams. The above issues render the author’s conclusion invalid.
