The United States of America can be considered a nation of immigrants, where the door is open for everyone; however, some people wish to close the door. Donald Trump, a candidate to become president, is an example of a person who wish to close the door. He gave a speech in Phoenix, Arizona claiming that illegal immigrants are causing problems in the country. The speech was benefitting his campaign in gaining votes, rallying the public for support, and discouraging the American public to not vote for his opponent, Hillary Clinton. Trump supported his claim of the United States having an illegal immigration problem by using ethos and pathos in his speech; however, his speech contain fallacies. At the beginning of the speech, Trump said,
…show more content…
Trump ensured to tell the public that all the arrested illegal immigrants in those stories have criminal records, creating a sense of fear within the public. He created a depressing setting and began to tell tragic stories to the audience, so they get a sense of fear of what could happen to them. Later on the speech, he invited guest speakers who shared their painful stories of losing their loved ones, which further striked the feelings of fear and sadness to the public. Trump convinced the audience that he was sad and feeling their pain; as a way to connect to the guest speakers on an emotional level. Therefore, indirectly announcing that he knows what the public are feelings and gaining a way to connect to them. Even with the uses of ethos and pathos to make a strong claim, the speech still is …show more content…
His speech contains many far-fetched beliefs. An example is when Trump said, “And, when we do, peace and law and justice and prosperity will prevail. Crime will go down. Border crossings will plummet. Gangs will disappear,” which is an example of hasty generalization-type fallacy. He made the statement that when the problem with illegal immigration is solved, then America will become a peaceful place and gangs will no longer exist. Trump expressed a questionable outcome from an unsound argument. Beside this hasty generalization-type, Trump’s speech contain other fallacies that were the result of the information he provided. He weaken his claim by making assumptions and statements, instead of a logical claim. Nevertheless, Trump was still able to provide a convincing
Trump ensured to tell the public that all the arrested illegal immigrants in those stories have criminal records, creating a sense of fear within the public. He created a depressing setting and began to tell tragic stories to the audience, so they get a sense of fear of what could happen to them. Later on the speech, he invited guest speakers who shared their painful stories of losing their loved ones, which further striked the feelings of fear and sadness to the public. Trump convinced the audience that he was sad and feeling their pain; as a way to connect to the guest speakers on an emotional level. Therefore, indirectly announcing that he knows what the public are feelings and gaining a way to connect to them. Even with the uses of ethos and pathos to make a strong claim, the speech still is …show more content…
His speech contains many far-fetched beliefs. An example is when Trump said, “And, when we do, peace and law and justice and prosperity will prevail. Crime will go down. Border crossings will plummet. Gangs will disappear,” which is an example of hasty generalization-type fallacy. He made the statement that when the problem with illegal immigration is solved, then America will become a peaceful place and gangs will no longer exist. Trump expressed a questionable outcome from an unsound argument. Beside this hasty generalization-type, Trump’s speech contain other fallacies that were the result of the information he provided. He weaken his claim by making assumptions and statements, instead of a logical claim. Nevertheless, Trump was still able to provide a convincing