# data[].attributes.body
treating an opinion as if it were  a plain truth
Ex 1: Students could focus on courses in their major if all these useless English courses were canceled.
Ex 2: Mr. Felderman is obviously the best principal  since he treats everyone so nicely.

# data[].attributes.body
comparisons between things that are not actually similar
Ex 1: If I can balance my checkbook, why can't Congress balance the budget?
Ex 2: I play the piano really well, so I should also be great in chemistry class, right?

# data[].attributes.body
giving easy answers to complicated questions, often accompanied by emotional appeals instead of logic
Ex 1: The more breaks an employee takes, the less productive she will be.
Ex 2:  Students would do far better in their afternoon classes if they had better options for lunch since most kids hate the unappealing food served.

# data[].attributes.body
offering weak or inadequate evidence to support a conclusion
Ex 1: Playing sports makes people aggressive. Look at all those fights at hockey and basketball games!
Ex 2: Students on the speech team are the teachers' favorites because almost all of them get good grades.

# data[].attributes.body
a statement that claims everyone agrees with it
Ex 1. Everyone at West Delaware likes football more then band.
Ex 2. Everyone at West Delaware's favorite lunch is school cheese pizza.

# data[].attributes.body
The goal is too discredit people or things without addressing the positions on issues or qualifications for office
Ex 1: Don't vote for Donald Trump for President he smokes meth with his local meth dealer
Ex 2: Don't vote for Matt he beats his chickens.

# data[].attributes.body
McDonalds is a healthy option because they give out apples as a side.

Abortion is a good thing, because if you get raped and not want the baby

# data[].attributes.body
dragging in a side issue that's not relevant to the debate
Ex. 1 Trump says Hillary wouldn't have been a good leader because of her email scandals.
Ex. 2 Trump is a good president because he was already famous.

# data[].attributes.body
There  are only two sides to a question
Ex: 1: Either we add more classes or we take some away.
Ex 2: Either we eat lunch at 11:45 or we don't eat lunch at all.

# data[].attributes.body
arguments attempts to convince readers that if one thing is allowed, it will lead to horrible consequences.
ex: If the school signed a health act, we wouldn't get dessert at lunch.
ex 2:  If one kids fails and retakes a test, then every kid should retake the test.

# data[].attributes.body
argument takes an unreasonable position to their opponents, then they counter argue that, rather than their original argument
Ex 1. People who don't support free school lunches don't care about the education of all students.
Ex 2. People who support underage driving don't care about the safety of drivers.

# data[].attributes.body
Assuming that because one event happens after another, the first must have caused the second.
Ex 1:  When I claped my hands the lights went off in the school.
Ex 2: When I slammed the car door the buildings windows shattered

# data[].attributes.body
Ex 1: You should donate to the red cross because it saves lives.
Ex 2:  We need guns to protect ourselves
Definition: frightening readers into supporting claims.

# data[].attributes.body
Conclusions based on irrelevant evidence

Ex 1: I like Mexican food so I should like Chinese food.
Ex 2: I'm good at football so that means I should be good at volleyball.