15.
　　This political advertisement recommends re-electing governor Adams because he has a proven leadership role in improving the state's economy. In support of this reason the author cites these statistics: in the past year, most state workers' wages have gone up; 5,000 new jobs have been created; and six corporations have located in the state. Another reason offered for re-electing Adams is a recent poll, which indicates that most respondents believe the state economy would continue to improve if he were re-elected. Finally, the author claims that rival Zebulon would harm the state's economy because he disagrees with Adams' fiscal¹ policies. This argument is fraught² with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted claims.

      To begin with, the statistics are intended to support the main claim that the state is economically better off with Adams as governor. But these statistics are vague and oversimplified, and thus may distort the state's overall economic picture. For example, state workers' pay raises may have been minuscule³ and may not have kept up with cost of living or with pay for state workers in other states. Moreover, the 5,000 new jobs may have been too few to bring state unemployment ratesdown significantly; at the same time, many jobs may have been lost. Finally, the poll indicates that six new corporations located in the state, but fails to indicate if any left.

      Next, the poll cited by the author is described in the vaguest possible terms. The ad does not indicate who conducted the poll, who responded, or how the poll was conducted. Until these questions are answered, the survey results areworthless as evidence for public opinion about Adams or his economic policies.

      Finally, while we have only vague and possibly distorted evidence that the state is better off with Adams, we have absolutely no evidence that it would be worse off with Zebulon. Given that the state economy is good at the moment, none of the author's reasons establishes that Adams is the cause of this. And neither do they establish that the state wouldn't be even better off with someone else in office.

      In conclusion, this argument is weak. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide additional information about the adequacy of state workers' pay raises, the effect of the 5,000 jobs on the state's employment picture, the overall growth of corporations in the state, and other features of the state economy. Also, the author must support the claims that Adams' actions have caused any economic improvement and that in the future Adams will impart more economic benefit than would Zebulon.
16.        
　　Demographic trends that indicate an increase in the number of college-aged people over the next ten years lead the author to predict an improved job market for all people seeking college-level teaching positions in their academic disciplines. Moreover, the author argues that since Waymarsh University students with advanced degrees had an especially difficult time finding teaching jobs in the past, these trends portend⁴ better times ahead for Waymarsh graduates. This argument is problematic in three important respects.

      First, the author assumes that an increase in the number of college-aged people over the next decade will necessarily result in an increase in the number of people who attend college during this period. While this is a reasonable assumption, it is by no means a certainty. For example, a world war or economic depression in the next decade would certainly nullify this expectation.

      Second, even if we grant the preceding assumption, we must also consider the additional assumption that increased university enrollments will lead to an increase in teaching positions in all fields. However, it might turn out that some teaching specialties⁵ are in greater demand than others in the future, resulting in a disproportionate number of teaching positions available in various fields. Consequently, persons trained in some fields might find it more difficult, if not impossible, to find teaching jobs in the future.

      Finally, little can be foretold⁶ regarding the employability of Waymarsh graduates in the future based on the information provided in the argument. Lacking information about the reasons why Waymarsh graduates had an especially difficult time finding teaching jobs, it is difficult to assess their prospects⁷ for the future. It is probable, however, that since Waymarsh has had an especially hard time placing graduates in the past, the mere⁸ fact that more jobs are available will not, by itself, ensure that Waymarsh graduates will have an easier time finding teaching jobs during the next decade.

      In conclusion, this argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide evidence that the only major trend in the next decade will be an increase in the number of people reaching college age. Regarding the future prospects for Waymarsh graduates, the author must provide evidence that there were no idiosyncratic reasons that prevented them from finding jobs in the past.