On Tuesday, Oct. 1, Sen. JD Vance and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz met in New York for their first and only vice presidential debate.
Compared to the presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, the candidates used far fewer obvious logical fallacies — “reasoning that comes to a conclusion without the evidence to support it,” according to Merriam-Webster. Still, Vance and Walz each used their fair share of fallacies last week.
Texas sharpshooter
“Kamala Harris has a record. 250,000 more manufacturing jobs just out of the IRA.” — Walz
The Texas sharpshooter fallacy occurs when one “fails to take randomness into account when determining cause and effect, instead emphasizing how outcomes are similar rather than how they are different,” according to Investopedia.
When moderator Norah O’Donnell asked Walz to address the fact that voters say they trust Trump on the economy more than Harris, Walz provided evidence that was not inherently true.
He brought up hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs that have been created since the Inflation Reduction Act was passed two years ago. He then attributed job creation to the IRA itself.
It’s still too early to discern the exact impact of the IRA on the United States manufacturing sector, according to Reuters. Though Walz isn’t inherently wrong — as the investments of the IRA created jobs — it isn’t necessarily true that the jobs were created solely due to the act.
Red herring
“Tim, I'm focused on the future. Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 COVID situation?” — Vance
A red herring is defined as “something that distracts attention from the real issue,” according to Merriam-Webster.
When Walz asked Vance whether Trump won the 2020 election, Vance didn’t answer. Instead, he pivoted to an accusation of Harris.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
“That is a damning non-answer,” Walz replied.
Later, when the results of the election were brought up once more, Vance again didn’t answer and instead mentioned the 2016 election. Vance never gave a straightforward “yes” or “no” in response to whether he believes Trump won the 2020 election.
False equivalence
“If we want to say that we need to respect the results of the election, I’m on board. But if we want to say — as Tim Walz is saying — that this is just a problem that Republicans have had, I don’t buy that.” — Vance
A false equivalence occurs when one argues that “two completely opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not,” according to Logically Fallacious.
When Walz said that Trump did not accept the outcome of the 2020 election, Vance replied by insinuating that leaders of both parties have committed the same act.
“Hillary Clinton in 2016 said that Donald Trump had the election stolen by Vladimir Putin,” Vance said.
Clinton alleged the election was stolen because of Facebook ads, Vance said. This comparison equated Clinton’s accusations to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters who believed the election was stolen by Biden and allies. Walz called out this false equivalence.
“January 6 was not Facebook ads,” Walz said.
“You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.” — Walz
When Vance accused Harris of censorship and called for the bipartisan rejection of it, Walz objected using an age-old comparison to justify his claim that there is no First Amendment right to spread disinformation.
Walz referenced a 1969 Supreme Court decision that prohibited free speech in some cases, according to MSNBC. The ruling prohibited speech that may incite imminent violence. Yelling that there’s a fire in a crowded theater when there isn’t one, for example, is not protected under free speech.
Spreading disinformation, however, does not fall under this Supreme Court decision, according to MSNBC. Walz faultily compared incitement of violence — a non-protected form of speech — to disinformation, which often protected.
Lauren Lifke is the managing editor for the Daily Lobo. She can be reached at managingeditor@dailylobo.com or on X @lauren_lifke
Lauren Lifke is the managing editor for the Daily Lobo. She can be reached at managingeditor@dailylobo.com or on Twitter @lauren_lifke
