Hillary Clinton Controversy: Fallacies In The Debate

After losing the last presidential elections, Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State in the Obama administration. Clinton future at the White House is questionable at this stage as she announced that she would no longer serve as Sectary of State and she would not run for presidency in 2012; some rumors however state that she considers competing in the 2016 elections. It is nevertheless worthwhile to mention that it has been nearly two centuries since any sectary of state has become United States president.

Watson uses the rhetorical appeal of ethos and pathos to convince her audience to fight against gender inequality by joining her campaign, HeForShe.

To keep the American tradition, President Obama signed an executive order requiring the loser of the Presidential election to leave the country. Obama stated "No Matter who that loser is".

Presidential nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a recent speech at a private fundraising event geared toward LGBT rights supporters, addressed her political opponent, Donald J. Trump and his supporters. The fundraiser was hosted by singer and actress, Barbra Streisand and her wealthy counterparts. The former Secretary of State argued that half of Donald Trump’s supporters can be put into a “basket of deplorable” and alluded that the other half are simply anti-government. Clinton supported her assertion by using logical fallacies by making hasty generalizations, faulty cause and effect, and bandwagon appeals. She also solidified her reasoning by stating, the supporters in the “basket of deplorable” are racists, sexists, xenophobic, and many

During the second Presidential Debate, which was televised on October 9, 2016, I was able to detect many logical fallacies within the arguments of both candidates. For example, when Donald Trump was first asked about the controversial tape that contained footage of him disrespecting and admitting to sexually assaulting women, he avoided this question by attempting to divert attention from this issue. Instead of concretely answering the question, Donald Trump briefly apologized, and then blatantly attempted to ignore the issue by talking about Isis “chopping people’s heads,” and randomly describing all the horrid things that Isis is doing. This logical fallacy is characterized as “Red Herring,” which

With the presidential election coming to a close, the campaigns of Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump are doing their best to attract voters now more than ever. The question is, who will be more successful? When analyzed in detail the Hilary Clinton campaign is appealing to their targeted audience in a way that makes her campaign more successful.

Bernie is now posting his best poll numbers of the campaign to date. He's only 4 points behind in Iowa and gaining, solidly ahead in New Hampshire, and has national momentum, too. What Sanders needed to do Sunday night was maintain that momentum, continue his appeal to liberal base voters, and blunt any attacks that Clinton might be tempted to unleash at him. He accomplished all of that, even if he didn't give a focused, dominant performance. His release of his single-payer financing details denied Clinton a major attack line, he avoided getting bogged down in guns (clearly his worst issue from the Democratic base's perspective), and he struck an tone that made him seem relatively above the fray as Clinton tried out various critiques targeting

As the next election is soon to approaching I have noticed that the presidential nominees are no more than a joke to the other people that have served this great country as the presidents of the united states.

With the presidential election coming to a close on this Tuesday, November 8th, the research that was gathered in class, allowed a new insight into which candidate was best suited for the job. Each candidate in this election, both have very different view points on each important topic going on in our country today, allowing voters to see the complete complexity of this election. For example, topics including gun control, the pay gap situation and abortion allowed myself, as a voter, to gain knowledge about each candidates position on the topic and which candidate I believed was my ideal one for presidency. In this election, I believe Hilary Clinton is the best candidate for presidency.

I would advise you to attack Hillary's mishandling of Benghazi. For example according to James Barrett, an author from The Daily Wire, from late 2011 through 2016 there were multiple attacks on the Benghazi outpost, as well on other United States international facilities and diplomats. Despite numerous requests to the Obama administration for new agents to help improve the security at the compound, no additional resources or personnel were sent by the administration. This ultimately led to the deaths of four Americans. At this time Hillary was the Secretary of State and was largely to blame for the mishandling of Benghazi. Hillary has even taken full responsibility for not adequately protecting the United States personnel in Benghazi. You need to ask the public this question: How is Hillary suppose the protect millions of people who live in America if she couldn't even protect the lives of the United States personnel in Benghazi? Furthermore I urge you to talk about Hillary's mishandling of classified information. In "Clinton's Handling of Classified Information" authors Eugene Kiely and Robert Farley explain that as Secretary of State Hillary used her own private email to send and receive over 30,000 emails. Hillary repeatedly refuted that her emails contained classified information. FBI Director James Comey said more than 2,000 emails

In Hillary Clinton’s campaign ad, she uses ethos and pathos to tear down Trump. She uses the story of man to make a point that Trump has no interest in Muslims.

Hillary Clinton uses the pathos rhetorical appeal more than the other two. When she says “ Isn’t he forgetting? Troops on the front lines. Police officers and firefighters who run towards danger.” (Farley, Robert). This shows pathos because she is appealing to the families of the people who risk their lives, and she cares about the people who work hard to make this country better. She also uses pathos when she says “I want you to know, I’ve heard you. your cause is our cause. Our country needs your ideas, energy, and passion.” (Clinton, Hillary). This uses this rhetorical appeal because it shows that she will take our ideas and what the people of the United States have to say and use them when she becomes president. She makes it seem like

Clinton uses imagery again to help her audience imagine some of the hardships women around the world face. She describes some of the specific problems and difficulties women face when she says "At this very moment, as we sit here, women around the world are giving birth, raising children, cooking meals, washing clothes, cleaning houses, planting crops, working on assembly lines, running companies, and running countries..." Clinton uses this sentence to create an image of the variation of the duties that women perform around the world. Some women are successful enough to be able to run companies and countries, while others are stuck with only being able to perform basic duties, like washing clothes, cooking meals, giving birth, raising children, etc. Next she explains how women don't have equality by explaining some of the rights they are being denied, she states "They are being denied the right to go to school by their own fathers and brothers. They are being forced into prostitution and they are being barred from the bank lending offices and banned from the ballot boxes." She explains in detail some of the difficulties

Clinton impressed people with the idea of a family man in office. He was focused and charismatic. Better economy was what the American people wanted so that is what his goal was. During his reign he went through more scandals and controversies than any other president. He was impeached, yet despite all, he was loved by America. Our economy prospered and we had better diplomatic relations. The American people wanted change for the better and so they elected William Jefferson Clinton for their forty-second president of the United States of America.

The use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or “wrong moves” in the construction of an argument are a fallacy. In a fallacious argument there might a deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is (Google). The two politicians debates, I decided to analyze were democrat Pat Quinn and republican Bruce Rauner. In these debates, I will be focusing on the fallacies that are used with what each politician is arguing. In political debates, each opponent will always use prepped material to make the other side look unsatisfactory, to earn another winning vote. Politics are won by lies, promises that are never achieved, and issues that will always remain unfixed.