The following appeared in the editorial section of Monroetown’s local newspaper.

“Mayor Brown was recently re-elected by a clear majority of 52 percent of Monroetown’s voters. Her re-election, however, does not show that most people in our town favored Mayor Brown’s proposal for tax reduction over that of her opponent, Mr. Greene, who proposed raising taxes to improve education. It has been shown that voters nationwide tend to re-elect people already in office, regardless of candidates’ proposals. In fact, a local survey after the election showed most people in Monroetown disagreed with Mayor Brown’s proposal. Clearly most people in Monroetown favor improving education and therefore approve of Mr. Greene’s proposal despite the fact that they did not vote for him.”

The given editorial concludes that most of the residents of Monroetown are in favor of improving education and they approve Mr. Greene’s proposal despite the fact that Mr. Greene was defeated by Mayor Brown by a majority of 52 percent in the recent elections for the mayor of Monroetown. The arguer further asserts that Mayor Brown’s proposal for tax-reduction is not favored by the residents of Monroetown regardless of the fact that they have voted for her. The claim made by the arguer is supported by evidence in the form of a recent survey after the elections in which the respondents expressed their disagreement with respect to Mayor Brown’s tax reduction proposal. The argument suffers from several flaws as the evidence provided by the arguer does little to substantiate the claim made therein.

The contention that voters across the nation are inclined towards re-electing people already in office may have no relevance in context of the voting tendencies of Monroetown’s residents. The arguer needs to provide substantial evidence that proves that the residents of Monroetown have the tendency to re-elect people who are already in power. It is likely that there is no instance in the past when the residents of Monroetown have re-elected a person who was already in office. Even if we assume that the tendencies of voters across the nation hold true for the residents of Monroetown as well, the arguer needs to bring out the time when the nationwide survey was taken. As the elections for the mayor have taken place in the recent past, it is not necessary that the same tendencies exist amongst the present residents of Monroetown. Due to lack of ample evidence in this regard, the reader cannot be convinced that the tendencies of voters across the nation are the same as those exhibited by the residents of Monroetown and that these tendencies have affected the elections in such a way that people have re-elected Mayor Brown in the face of disagreeing with her tax-reduction proposal.

Another lacuna in the given argument is lack of information regarding the time when the local survey was conducted. It is known that the survey was conducted after the elections, but if the survey was conducted a long time after the elections, then the results of the survey would have a different connotation. This is because there would be changes in the population of Monroetown over the time that has been spent after the elections. It is likely that people who had participated in the elections were no longer available for their opinions when the local survey was conducted. Moreover, there is no information pertaining to whom the survey’s respondents had voted for. It is likely that a majority of the people who participated in the survey was of those who had voted for Mr. Greene and hence, their disagreement with Mayor Brown’s proposal would be evident. Therefore, there is a need to provide information related to whom the respondents had voted for before concluding that people did not vote for Mr. Greene, but they approve of the proposal suggested by him.

The arguer unfairly assumes that if people do not approve of Mayor Brown’s proposal, then it is evident that they are in favor of Mr. Greene’s proposal. The arguer needs to rule out the possibility that the residents of Monroetown may not agree with either of the proposals. Therefore, lack of adequate evidence has rendered the given argument unpersuasive and indefensible in several respects.