I. Introduction
In a USA Today article the Associated Press discusses how Cain changes his story about the accusations during his television interviews. A Republican presidential candidate, Herman Cain was accused of sexual harassment with two women during his position as head of the National Restaurant Association during the 1990s. In addition, as Cain tries to defend himself on the issue, his campaign and seat as a Republican president could possibly be in jeopardy due to these allegations.
II. Link to the source material
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-11-01/herman-cain-allegations/51026760/1
III. Embed some relevant portion of the original material
http://bcove.me/ye8hv746
IV. Paraphrase
(Premise 1): Herman Cain’s struggles to contain the fallout from sexual harassment allegations.
(Premise 2): Herman Cain race
(Premise 3): Contenders contradictory explanations over two days have raised questions about details of the allegations
(Premise 4): Cain’s claims that the complaints were totally baseless and false have caused the woman to speak out publicly against him
(Premise 5): Cain has paid off two other women to keep them from speaking out against him
(Conclusion): Herman Cain success’s in his campaign is compromised
V. Analysis
"Raised a point of view about the details of the allegations from back in the 1990s and about his current ability to manage a crisis in the national spotlight"That is a fallacy of weak analogy which is committed when the analogy is not strong enough to support the conclusion that is drawn. In this argument they are basing how he handles a sex scandal to assume this is how he will handle ALL problems. Obviously, handling a war or fixing an economy is different than a sex scandal. Thus, the argument is fallacious.
In a USA Today article the Associated Press discusses how Cain changes his story about the accusations during his television interviews. A Republican presidential candidate, Herman Cain was accused of sexual harassment with two women during his position as head of the National Restaurant Association during the 1990s. In addition, as Cain tries to defend himself on the issue, his campaign and seat as a Republican president could possibly be in jeopardy due to these allegations.
II. Link to the source material
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-11-01/herman-cain-allegations/51026760/1
III. Embed some relevant portion of the original material
http://bcove.me/ye8hv746
IV. Paraphrase
(Premise 1): Herman Cain’s struggles to contain the fallout from sexual harassment allegations.
(Premise 2): Herman Cain race
(Premise 3): Contenders contradictory explanations over two days have raised questions about details of the allegations
(Premise 4): Cain’s claims that the complaints were totally baseless and false have caused the woman to speak out publicly against him
(Premise 5): Cain has paid off two other women to keep them from speaking out against him
(Conclusion): Herman Cain success’s in his campaign is compromised
V. Analysis
"Raised a point of view about the details of the allegations from back in the 1990s and about his current ability to manage a crisis in the national spotlight"That is a fallacy of weak analogy which is committed when the analogy is not strong enough to support the conclusion that is drawn. In this argument they are basing how he handles a sex scandal to assume this is how he will handle ALL problems. Obviously, handling a war or fixing an economy is different than a sex scandal. Thus, the argument is fallacious.
No comments:
Post a Comment