Blog Post 9: Debate

I watched the democratic debate on October 13. Many candidates made many arguments throughout the debate. Bernie Sanders argued that America should learn from Denmark and Norway regarding healthcare and adjust its healthcare system to be more socialist. He said that because those systems worked for those countries why won't they work for the United States? O'Malley made the argument that more gun regulations should be passed and used the story of a family who's child was murdered by guns acquired illegally to create pathos for his argument. Although O'Malley made many valid points, he often resorted to the pathos appeal when logos or ethos might make his arguments more effective.

I noticed Hillary dodging the question in many situations. When she was asked a more uncomfortable question such as one about Bengazi and other situations, she twisted the discussion to a topic that she was more comfortable with, using the fallacy of obfuscation. This caused her arguments to be less effective and for her to be a weaker contender in the debate. She also made an unsubstantiated claim when she said that the economy is better when a Democrat is in office. This is an untrue statement and was said without any evidence or reason. This was an untrue assumption that was very misleading for the audience.