Ronald Reagan Pros And Cons

796 Words4 Pages

When it comes to arguments, debates, and anything else, you must do and say tailored things in order to show your point or justify how you're right. Comparable to the debate during the 1980 US presidential election, the two candidates, current President Jimmy Carter and California Governor Ronald Reagan, participated in a debate over how they would address inflation if elected, and they did so to persuade the public to vote for them in the election. In the debate, Ronald Reagan had a better argument because of what he said and how he said it. Firstly, in the debate about inflation, Ronald Reagan had a more compelling argument because he used evidence in the form of statistics. "When Mr. Carter became President [in 1977], inflation was 4.8 percent, …show more content…

"Why is it inflationary to let the people keep more of their money and spend it the way they'd like, and it isn't inflationary to let him (Carter) take that money and spend it the way he wants?" "1980 Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter Presidential Debate." Ronald Reagan, Accessed May 9, 2023. Pathos is a literary device that appeals to the audience's emotions. A persuasive argument is won through manipulating emotions rather than using solid evidence. A mistake in reasoning known as emotional appeal occurs when a debater tries to win an argument by rousing the audience's and opponent's emotions. To win over the audience and popular opinion, one must not rely simply on emotional appeal, but the fact of the matter is that he used it to boost his own opinion and make people think about who has their best interests at heart. The benefit of having more money in people's pockets is that if people have more money to spend on leisurely things, then as long as people are doing very well, businesses will also be doing better, and so on until inflation decreases naturally through money

Open Document