Harris stands by US election integrity

Analyzing the article

ABC News
appeal to ridicule
appeal to authority

Our Analysis: 2 Fallacies


When you then talk in this way in a presidential debate and deny what over and over again are court cases you have lost, because you did in fact lose that election, it leads one to believe that perhaps we do not have in the candidate to my right the temperament or the ability to not be confused about fact. That's deeply troubling. And the American people deserve better.


Harris highlights the broad consensus on the election's integrity among voters, courts, and international observers, suggesting Trump's refusal to concede is both undemocratic and damaging to the United States' global standing. However, her reliance on generalized statements about world leaders' opinions and military officials' criticisms without specific examples weakens the concrete validity of her argument.

1. appeal to ridicule • Harris's remark about world leaders "laughing at Donald Trump" could be considered an appeal to ridicule fallacy.


And I'm going to tell you that I have traveled the world as vice president of the United States. And world leaders are laughing at Donald Trump.


This attempts to make Trump's position appear ridiculous or absurd without directly addressing the substance of his arguments. (This is similar to what Trump had done earlier in the debate, when he also used the word "laughing" to make an appeal to ridicule.)

2. appeal to authority • Harris's claim that unnamed "military leaders" called Trump "a disgrace" does seem to constitute an appeal to authority fallacy.


I have talked with military leaders, some of whom worked with you. And they say you're a disgrace.


She is citing the opinions of these leaders as authoritative evidence against Trump, rather than providing direct reasoning or evidence to rebut his points.

References

Comments

In order to participate in the conversation, head over to your account and setup a Screen Name
In order to participate in the conversation, you must sign in.
In order to participate in the conversation, you must sign up or sign in.

Disclaimer

Note that there being one or more apparent fallacies in the arguments presented in this article does not mean that every argument the arguer made was fallacious, nor does it mean there are not other arguments in existence for the same or similar position that are logically valid. Also note that checking for fallacies is not the same as verification of the premises the arguer starts from, such as facts that the arguer asserts or principles that the arguer assumes as the foundation for constructing arguments. For more about this, see our 'What is Fallacy Checking?'

NO AI TRAINING

Without in any way limiting the author’s [and publisher’s] exclusive rights under copyright, any use of this publication to “train” generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to generate text is expressly prohibited. The author reserves all rights to license uses of this work for generative AI training and development of machine learning language models.

Greetings! Kindly review our privacy and cookie policies to assess your preferences regarding cookie engagement.