Allstate makes it seem as if teenage girls can't drive with emotions which is a hasty generalization. There is no evidence or real event to back up this claim. There is a rare possibility of a teenage girl learning that a guy she likes has been kissed and being emotionally distraught and crashing into a car yet continuing to drive off.

Allstate utilizes these two fallacies to further convince the viewers that their insurance company protects you from a car accident. It also helps to convince viewers with teenage daughters that they will find it hard to drive with "emotions," which will inevitably lead to a car accident, so by having Allstate, they will be protected from that. 

Logical Fallacy: Without having to think about it, the slogan “you’re not you when you’re hungry” logically does not make any sense; no matter what, you are still you. 

- Hasty Generalization: Snickers concludes that people act differently when they are hungry based on an assumption that people are usually moody or cranky when they are hungry. While this may be true, it only applies to small amounts of people from around the world. 

- Slippery Slope: 

Snickers concludes that by eating a Snickers bar, it will set off a chain reaction of you “becoming yourself” again, returning to your normal state. This is a clear logical fallacy because even if you are hungry, you are still you. 

Logical Fallacy: This ad has generalized that everyone who wants to eat a salad would rather eat a burger instead, which isn’t true. There is no evidence or proof that proves this and people could be eating salad because they genuinely like it and would rather have that than a burger, not because they were forced to. 

"There are some things money can't buy. For everything else, there's MasterCard." 

Claim: This implies that everything that can be bought, can be done with a Mastercard, and that it is the exclusive method in which to buy anything and everything, as long as it is not something money cannot buy. 

As reasonable and catchy as this sounds, MasterCard's slogan does not hold much truth. It is an instance of a fallacy, specifically a false dilemma. The tagline provides only two drastic alternatives despite the various methods of payment that exist today including credit cards apart from MasterCard, checks, etc. In limiting the audience’s options and suggesting that either something can’t be bought, or otherwise can be bought with a MasterCard, people experience “false dilemmas” and thus, mistakenly assume that they are obligated to choosing from these two choices. 

By making it seem unimaginable to purchase anything without the use of their card, people are forced into corners of false perception and are likely to feel the urge to use a MasterCard of their own. 

The two-case scenario that the slogan proposes is unrealistic, as there are not only other alternative methods of purchasing, but also situations in which a MasterCard would be useless. 

Evidently, not everything can be bought with a MasterCard, and not everyone can purchase anything they desire. By establishing a false sense of assurance in the financial world, people may even be led to believe that the wide range of things money cannot buy is possible through a MasterCard. It is untrue that for the things that can be bought, a MasterCard exists to buy those things. 

This fallacy suggests that the argument is not credible or realistic, and in fact even offensive to some people in their attempt to persuade the audience. 

The advertisement can be better in various ways if it provides genuine qualities of the company that show its superiority to its rivals, which would prove to be more rational and sensible. Despite their attempt in luring customers through their ostensible ability to solve their financial burdens, they should, nevertheless, have a  pragmatic approach.