Fallacies In The Bill Clinton Debate

During this debate there are arguments constantly going and many, many fallacies being made non-stop and rhetorical strategies always being used. Most of the arguments that appear throughout the debate were based off of an question that was asked by the audience or the host, and this is when everything happens due to the candidates committing so many fallacies to persuade Americans that they are fit for the position to be the President. During the debate the candidates were questioned on things that they may have done in the past that can hurt their chances of becoming president, than they explain their reasoning and why they are still fit for the job. Clinton was questioned on her email incident, and Trump was questioned about his uncalled for behavior, then they both were questioned about their maturity when it came to debates. All three rhetorical strategies are used various times, in the beginning Clinton uses ethos, or an appeal to authority,
for example, every time they were asked a question both candidates would commit a Red Herring or sidetracking the issue, leading the argument down side road. This method was found effective to Trump and Clinton because it would help them go around the question which was usually an issue but to cover it up with something relatable or beneficial to them. Next, Trump does this was the most other than the red herring fallacy, which is the Slippery Slope fallacy or Ignoring your opponents complex argument in order to set up and defeat an exaggerated or weaker argument. Trump was asked about the whole incident that he had with women, he had very little to say and argue his point so he would ignore the the situation completely while he sets up a stronger statement that has to do with making America safe by building a wall and controlling the Middle East, which can also be another red herring