Biden's arguments in this segment of the presidential debate, while more focused on the original question about childcare than Trump's, still do not provide a comprehensive plan for addressing childcare affordability, as he only briefly mentions increasing the child care tax credit and encouraging businesses to provide child care facilities.

1. red herring • In this section of the debate dedicated to childcare costs, Biden does briefly mention some policies related to childcare, such as increasing the child care tax credit and encouraging businesses to have child care facilities.

However, he quickly pivots to criticizing Trump's tax policies and record on trade with China, which are not directly related to the specific question about making childcare more affordable.

2. appeal to authority • The following statement from Biden suggests that because presidential historians, who are implied to be authoritative figures, voted a certain way, their assessment must be correct without any need to present the reasoning behind their conclusion.

...presidential historians...they voted who's the worst president in American history.

Biden is correct that a recent survey of historians ranked Trump last. The challenge with this statistic is that historical evaluations of presidents can change significantly over time (a fact that Biden fails to mention). The examples of Eisenhower and Nixon are perfect illustrations of this.

Eisenhower's reputation has indeed undergone a major shift. In the 1962 New York Times survey, he was viewed poorly, tied for last place. But as time passed and historians gained more perspective on his presidency, his standing improved dramatically. By 1982, he was in the top 10 in the Chicago Tribune survey. This change reflects a growing appreciation for Eisenhower's steady leadership during the Cold War, his role in ending the Korean War, and his warnings about the "military-industrial complex."

Similarly, Nixon's place in these rankings has fluctuated. Immediately after his resignation, he was often ranked near the bottom due to the Watergate scandal. However, some later evaluations have been more nuanced, acknowledging his foreign policy achievements, such as opening relations with China, even as his domestic scandals still weigh heavily on his legacy.

These examples underscore that presidential rankings are not fixed or definitive. They are shaped by the evolving perspectives of historians and the public, and can be influenced by changing cultural attitudes, newly available information, and the passage of time, which allows for a more comprehensive assessment of a president's long-term impact.

This historical context reinforces the idea that Biden's use of authority in citing these presidential rankings, while not entirely fallacious, should be taken with a grain of salt. A single survey of historians, even if conducted recently, does not necessarily represent a final or unassailable verdict on a president's place in history.