NAME:LEYRE ELORZ DATE:26/03/22

FLORIDA 2018
During this debate a main cause was raised which was the use of weapons, before this issue
both opponents have had to respond to the audience, this has led both to use a series of
arguments to dominate the debate and get people to vote for them. Here I have made a
selection of the arguments they have used:

ANDREW GILLUM:

 AD POPULUMHe uses it at the beginning of the debate when he is asked the first
question as he begins with a case that he had to live and defends his idea of vetoing
this law, by naming what would happen to our children, thus referring to all US
parents, to make them aware that their children may suffer some harm, by using
words like "our kids", “our neighborhoods” he is referring to all those children in the
country.
 STRAW MANAfter the republican candidate answered the question that the
moderator had asked him, he answered with an argument that the republican could
not refute, well, as he advanced the other tried to intervene but each time, he found it
more difficult and Andrew Gillum ended up ending the dispute between the two. With
this example we see very clearly how an argument can weaken the previous one and
attack it as less impressive.

ROBERT DESANTIS:

 AD HOMINEMWhen during his explanation the candidate of the Democratic party

intervenes, he takes advantage of refuting the argument he was explaining to say that
"He is not the one who is going to make Florida a safe place" with this leads us viewers
to think that he is someone who doesn't care about us even a little bit. With this
argument he is trying to belittle the other candidate and go against him and above all
to emphasize that he is not a person who cares about the welfare of citizens.
 SLIPPERY SLOPEIn response to the first question, he defends the idea of vetoing this
law, saying that if citizens want security for their children, therefore this law should be
vetoed, with this it leads one to think that if this insecurity continues, this fear among
children and their families this can reach an extreme point. So, we have a clear case of
slippery slope, since we have a first phenomenon that is to veto that law, because this
will carry out a chain reaction because it will remove those insecurities, fears that all
citizens are feeling.