In discussing abortion at the presidential Debate, Trump's argument centers on returning abortion law to states and framing it as a victory for popular opinion, aligning himself with figures like Ronald Reagan. However, his claims rely on fallacies, including misrepresenting pro-choice stances as extreme and asserting unified opinions that are unlikely given the divisive nature of the issue.

1. straw man Trump misrepresents Biden's stance on abortion by suggesting that Biden supports abortion up to and even after birth.

So that means he can take the life of the baby in the ninth month and even after birth, because some states - Democrat-run - take it after birth. Again, the governor - former governor of Virginia: put the baby down, then we decide what to do with it. So he's in - he's willing to, as we say, rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month and kill the baby.

This portrayal distorts Biden's actual position, which aligns with the parameters set by Roe v. Wade, a ruling that did not permit elective abortions up to the point of birth. Trump constructs this exaggerated scenario to make Biden's position seem more extreme and morally reprehensible than it actually is.

2. red herring Right in the middle of the debate on abortion, Trump abruptly pivots to the border issue.

There have been many young women murdered by the same people he allows to come across our border. We have a border that's the most dangerous place anywhere in the world...

Trump's move to discussing border security and immigrant crime is not directly relevant to the question at hand. This diverts attention from the core abortion issue.

3. appeal to popularity Trump claims that "everybody" wanted Roe v. Wade overturned and abortion law returned to the states.

Fifty-one years ago, you had Roe v. Wade, and everybody wanted to get it back to the states, everybody, without exception, Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives. Everybody wanted it back. Religious leaders.

While this statement might resonate with some, it's highly unlikely that such a complex and controversial issue had unanimous support from all political and social groups. But the dubious nature of the claim is not the logical fallacy here. The fallacy is that even if "everybody" did support overturning Roe v. Wade (which is statistically unlikely), that widespread support wouldn't inherently make it the right decision. The validity of a legal or moral stance is not determined by a headcount, and arguing solely based on perceived popularity is a logical fallacy.

4. appeal to authority Trump claims that "every legal scholar, throughout the world, the most respected" wanted abortion law returned to the states.

Now, 10 years ago or so, they started talking about how many weeks and how many of this are getting into other things, but every legal scholar, throughout the world, the most respected, wanted it brought back to the states. I did that.

This statement uses an overly broad generalization about the opinions of legal experts to lend credibility to his actions. It's improbable that every single respected legal scholar globally held this view, making this statement an exaggeration intended to solidify his position by invoking unspecified authority figures.

5. hasty generalization with nut-picking and weak man Trump paints the entire pro-choice movement as "radical" based on extreme and uncommon situations.

The problem they have is they're radical because they will take the life of a child in the eighth month, the ninth month, and even after birth - after birth.

This ignores the diversity of views within the movement and misrepresents the majority of pro-choice advocates who do not support late-term abortions except in specific, often tragic, circumstances.

By focusing solely on the most extreme and emotionally charged examples (late-term abortions, which are extremely rare and often medically necessary), Trump avoids engaging with the core arguments for abortion rights and misrepresents the overall pro-choice position. This tactic is a form of nut-picking, where one highlights extreme outliers to discredit an entire group, and also contributes to a weak man fallacy by misrepresenting the opposing argument.