The following appeared as a part of an advertisement for Adams, who is seeking reelection as governor.“Re-elect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, seventy percent of the state’s

The argument claims that to have proven leadership in improving the state’s economy, Adam should be re-elected as the governor. The author cites an evidence that in the past year, there was an increase of seventy percent of the state’s workers’ wages, five thousand new jobs have been introduced and six corporations have placed their headquarters in that city. The author states that all this was possible only because of Adam. Furthermore, the author states that many of the respondents in a poll believed that if Adam is re-elected then the state will continue to improve. In addition to this, the argument claims that if Zebulon is elected as the governor, who is an opponent of Adam, then the state will go in a wrong direction. The reason for this which the author mentioned is that Zebulon disagrees with Adam’s policies. The conclusion of the argument relies on unconvincing assumption for which there is no clear evidence. Hence the argument is weak and has several flaws.

Firstly, the argument readily assumes that because the state was headed by Adam as the governor, it achieved success. There is no clear evidence which the author mentioned to his statement. The author cited some examples that seventy percent workers wages have been increased, five thousand jobs have been created and six corporations have started its headquarters because of Adam. But it is not clear that all this was possible only because of Adam. These events might be only done in order to seek attention of the public so that the re-elect Adam as their governor. It might be possible that after Adam is re-elected, he would not concentrate on all these factors.

Another reason for disagreeing with Adam is that, there might be a separate department which made all these events possible and which not linked with Adam’s ministry. Here, in this argument, the author failed to mention many relevant facts because of which the argument conveys a distorted view of the situation.

Secondly, the argument claims that Zebulon will take the state in wrong way, only because he does not support the policies of Adam. This is clearly an invalid statement which is given by the author. Only because one person is against the policies of another, it cannot be assumed that he will not be a good governor of the state and he will take the state in a wrong way. Zebulon is not in support of Adam’s policies, but he might be equally or more qualified for the position of a governor as is Adam. Additionally, Zebulon might probably have his own policies which he thinks are much better than that of Adam’s and because of which he does not support Adam. Without unconvincing answers, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed due to the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could have been considerably strengthened if the author had cited more evidences with respect to both the persons who are standing for election. Due to full-fledged information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.