The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper.
“In the first four years that Montoya has served as mayor of the city of San Perdito, the population has decreased and the unemployment rate has increased. Two businesses have closed for each new business that has opened. Under Varro, who served as mayor for four years before Montoya, the unemployment rate decreased and the population increased. Clearly, the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted Montoya out of office and reelected Varro.”
The argument in the editorial section of the local newspaper is unconvincing because its conclusion depends on unsubstantiated assumption of residents of San Perdito not well served under Montoya as compared to Varro. Each of the following areas merit further explanation before it can be given any degree of credibility of its conclusion of voting Montoya out of office and reelecting Varro.
Firstly, one cannot ignore the possibility that the dubious policies and laws of Varro might have shown its consequences after his tenure as mayor. It might be the possibility that the policies adapted by Varro during his office time, were so unpopular and unfavorable that the true colors are seen in the tenure of Montoya. Assuming that Montoya is a very capable person but still he might not have been able to counter the policies adopted by Varro, consequently, showing disastrous results in the form of decreased population and increased unemployment. Additionally, one can definitely question the election of Montoya if Varro would have done a great job in his first tenure.
Secondly, the possibility of a bleak and weak economy during the tenure of Montoya would have been responsible for the dubious results of performance. Economy might have been very weak and fragile throughout the country or world, which would have touched the residents of San Perdito too. A possibility of such a global phenomenon can hardly be ignored unless further information of the economic scenario is given for comparison.
Last but not the least, the editorial section lacks concrete data and figures to compare the population and unemployment rate during the tenures of Montoya and Varro. One needs further solid figures to come to any conclusion of good tenure of Varro compared to Montoya.
Due to the many holes in the reasoning in the arguments of the report, it is difficult to take the arguments seriously. Unless further evidence surface in each of the areas discussed above, the given premises are insufficient proof that the conclusion drawn is viable.