Situation: A politician rerunning is saying a speech and there are reporters from various newspapers. One can be a cameraperson. The other can be a bodyguard.
Politician: I welcome all of you. If there are any questions, please feel free to interrupt me. Let me start off my speech by saying how grateful I am for all of you coming here. These are the plans that my party and I have discussed. My party and I feel that it is our sole duty to take care of the growing population of immigrants in our land. Why should we allow these foreign devils to take over the industries that so rightfully belong to our own countrymen? Almost every foreigner has taken over our big companies. Sooner or later ALL of them will and-
Reporter: Uh, senator? You're using Hasty Generalization, aren't you? That's a fallacy. Just because some foreigners have taken over, not all of them are bound to . You're resorting to too few instances just to support a conclusion.
Politician: What? Oh, yes. Ahem. Let me then go further into my speech by addressing the growing need of Senior Citizen homes. Everyone sees them as a big burden, including myself, therefore my party and I believe that it is a necessity that they be put in homes to-
Reporter: Sir? That was a Dicto Simplifier. Yes, most people see that taking caring of their elders as a burden, but there are others that don't. That was an unqualified generalization.
P: Whatever. As I was saying. Getting back to the issue. If there are homes for the aged, and homes for the homeless, then there should be homes for the schoolchildren as well. I mean, with these homes for school children, think of how many parents would be able to have the whole house to themselves. And think of the food bills these parents would save, not to mention all the unnecessary headaches and aspirin bills that go with it-
R: Senator, you're using a False analogy right there. The reason why the aged and the homeless are put in homes is because they have none. School children have homes. They also have parents who love 'em. Homeless people usually don't have anyone to care for them, same goes for the aged. They've been discarded by society, whereas schoolchildren haven't. False analogy is when the situation differs and you're making an analogy between them.
Another R: Sir, I'd like to ask about your opinion on whether or not you believe in God. I want to know how you defend your faith.
P: Of course I believe in God! I'm a very religious person. I go to mass every Sunday! And I take communion every once in a awhile and other uhh. religious stuff. God can do anything.
R: If that were true, sir, would you think that since God can do anything, he would make a stone so heavy he couldn't lift it?
P: ( wipes swear from brow ) Is that a trick question?
Cameraman: Ohhhh, I know what fallacy that is! It's Contradictory Premises! It's when there can be no argument since the premises of the argument contradict. Like the question of " Which came first, the chicken or the egg ?"
R: Frankly, I think the egg came first.
Another R: No, it was the chicken!
Cameraman: I agree! It was the chicken!
Another R: Or Maybe it could be the egg.
P: Hey, who cares! Pay attention to me! Look, I know I'm not all that good a senator, but you must admit that I am better than my running opponent. I mean, LOOK at him! The person hardly has a degree, not even for acting ! He's been in jail for the past three years, he's not married, he's old, has a lisp, can't add right. He's not even remotely attractive! How can anyone choose him?
R: Senator, you were just Poisoning the Well. That's when you attack the person and you don't tackle the subject instead. You're trying to sway our votes by making it seem like your opponent isn't worthy.
P: Come on! I've been senator for a year! And look! Not one criminal has escaped prison!
R: Sir, Post Hoc. Just because you're senator doesn't mean that you're the reason why those criminals haven't escaped. That's not the right cause, the premises are irrelevant to the conclusion.
P: Listen, if it weren't for me, who do you think would make the suggestion to create the MRT? It was ME that thought of it! The credit for making that train should go to me!
Another R: Sir, you didn't make the train. And I believe there were others who had the same suggestion. If you didn't suggest it, I 'm sure there would be others that would. You're using Hypothesis Contrary to Fact. You can't start a conclusion from a false hypothesis.
P: Oh please, vote for me! I can't get another job otherwise! Pleaaaaaseee. I got two wives and 5 kids. not to mention, numerous villas which I haven't paid for yet, a house on mortgage, 3 cars that I really must sell off for new ones, a -
Bodyguard of Senator whispers in ear: Sir. Please don't use Ad Misericoridium. That's a fallacy of using an argument based on emotions. You can't use sympathy. The public really hates it when we use that.
Another R: ( shakes head in disgust ) I can see that this is pointless.
Cameraman: Total waste of footage in my opinion.
R: ( packs microphone away ) So, let's go eat? Or hey, let's check out the opponent of this guy. Maybe that guy has more interesting stuff to say.
Cameraman: ( as they are walking away ) So, who you gonna vote for this coming election?
R: Definitely not that guy. ( points to politician )
Bodyguard to Politician: I told you sir. They really hate Ad Misericordium.
Politician: Shut up. Do I pay you to state your opinions? No!