Question

read the passage from a debate speech. the current trade situation in this nation is unacceptable. we continue to lose money to other nations, while those nations prosper. i have a detailed plan to get our country—and its people—back on the right track. my opponent, who uses her time to spread lies and rumors while eating nice dinners bought by you taxpayers, does not even have a plan. i question her priorities. which statement best explains why the evidence provided in the text is a fallacy? the speaker uses anecdotal evidence with phrases like \back on the right track.\ the speaker uses a bandwagon statement by complaining that other nations prosper. the speaker uses an ad hominem argument by attacking an opponent’s honesty. the speaker uses a false dilemma by claiming to have the ideal plan.

Explanation:

An ad hominem fallacy occurs when an argument attacks the person making a claim rather than addressing the claim itself. In the speech, the speaker shifts focus from the trade plan debate to attacking their opponent's character (accusing them of spreading lies, using taxpayer money for dinners) instead of engaging with the opponent's actual positions or lack of plan in a substantive way.

• The first option is incorrect because "back on the right track" is a vague slogan, not anecdotal evidence.
• The second option is incorrect; complaining about other nations' prosperity is not a bandwagon appeal (which relies on claiming something is true because others do it).
• The fourth option is incorrect; there is no false dilemma (presenting only two extreme options) in the speech.

Answer:

C. The speaker uses an ad hominem argument by attacking an opponent's honesty.