Donald Trump is quite obviously the comedic forerunner of the upcoming presidential election. His absurd facial expressions and statements have been the focus of political humor for quite some time. As funny as he may be, his arguments often persuade an alarming amount of people over to his side. Trump often uses logical fallacies in order to capture his audience and convince them to support him and his ideas. When attacking his competitors, however, Trump often chooses to strike at the candidate themselves, rather than explaining why he disagrees with their policies.
Ad hominem is one of Trump's favorite ways to win (or seem to win) a debate. Trump almost never explicitly explains why he disagrees with another candidate's idea, but instead chooses to accuse his opponent of various misdoings which undermine the opposing candidate's ethos. One example of Trump's use of ad hominem is shown in a GOP debate from October 28, 2015. During the debate, Trump was asked to respond to Senator Kasich's views on the federal budget. Instead of explaining what was wrong with Kasich's plan, Trump immediately accuses Kasich of being unable to run the country because a company he had previously owned went bankrupt. In doing this, Trump persuades his audience that Kasich is an unreliable candidate, therefore incapable of running the country. This is a clear example of an ad hominem logical fallacy, one that is not uncommon throughout Trump's speeches and debates.
I also did an example of Trump's use of ad hominem. I believe that Trump uses ad hominem too much to the point that his use of it is ineffective. Do you agree? Do you believe that Trump's persuasion that Kasich is unreliable was effective? Also, you stated that Trump is the comedic forerunner of the upcoming election. Do you think that title helps or hurts Trump? Great job!
ReplyDelete