Voting for Economic Growth

The following appeared as a part of an advertisement for Adams, who is seeking reelection as governor:

"Reelect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, 70 percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, 5,000 new jobs have been created, and six corporations have located their headquarters here. Most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected. Adams’s opponent, Zebulon, would lead our state in the wrong direction, because Zebulon disagrees with many of Adams’s economic policies."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The advertisement tries to convince people to vote for Adam on the basis of his economic achievements. Further, it tries to use this reasoning to convince people that Adam's competitor Zebulon would not be able to sustain the economic growth as he disagrees with Adam's policies. The reasoning is not very convincing due to many reasons.

The reasoning attempts to present economic growth as a simplistic function of worker wages, jobs created and corporations moving to the state. Concrete figures that can be compared with other states may have been more convincing. For example if the argument would have said that the state's gross production and human development index improved at a rate reasonably ahead of other states in the country, it would have sounded more convincing and well-reasoned. Every event needs a reference or a comparison to ascertain its magnitude.

Further, one cannot rely on one of the many polls to forward the reasoning; especially when no reference is given as to who conducted the poll and how. At best this claim may be taken with a pinch of salt. If the advertisement named a polling agency known to be neutral and efficient, it would have helped the reasoning a lot.

Lastly, there may be two different and yet equally good ways to reach the same destination. So a generalistic claim that anything that does not agree with Adam's policies will be detrimental for the economy does not hold any water. If the reasoning would have tried to nail a specific example from Zebulon's economic agenda, it would have been more convincing.

Concluding, the presented reasoning falters on account of being vague and generalistic. Making it a little focused can turn it into a reasonably strong line of argument. However in its current form it is not very good.