US Senators Sloan and Jacobs are bitter political enemies. Jacobs is a "hawk" (pro-military and endorses an aggressive foreign policy) while Sloan is moderate on most issues. In this situation, they are contending over a bill.

Sloan has been speaking for some time and this is her closing.

Sloan: "Based on the testimony from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it seems clear that the Pentagon will be able to maintain a strong defense even with a 10% cut in the defense budget. Further, the experts in the Defense Department agree with their assessment. As I mentioned earlier, the Secretary of Education has brought to my attention some very serious problems in American education. According to several studies, the US will have the least prepared high school graduates in the free world. Needless to say, this will probably have a significant impact on the US economy. I have put forth a bill, the gist of which is that the money taken from the defense budget will be put into a special fund for salvaging America's public schools, with a special emphasis on schools that have been historically underfunded. As the bill indicates, there are fifty carefully planned projects that detail, almost to the cent, where the money is going. 

"This is a reasonable and safe proposal. It will give America a brighter future and a solid foundation for growth.

"So, I urge you to vote for the bill."

Jacobs takes the floor and, after some preliminary remarks, says the following:

Jacobs: "As you all know, my esteemed colleague Senator Sloan is putting forth a proposal to transfer needed money from defense to education. She says that this is a reasonable and safe proposal. Now, I ask you, what is safe about stripping the defense budget down to the bare bones? What is reasonable about leaving the Pentagon with a few coins to buy the arms needed to protect this sacred democracy? She says that her bill will give America a brighter future and a solid foundation for growth. Well, what is so bright about pouring untold billions into schools? How can a solid foundation be built by handing out money to future slackers and welfare cheats? So, I say to you, we must protect our great nation from this attempt to strip away her shield and sword, from this attempt to loot the coffers of defense, from this attempt to waste money in an unplanned escapade of ill-considered spending. So, the bill she is proposing must be rejected."DivisionPoisoning the WellStraw ManAppeal to FearDivision: This is a wrong answer. Jacobs is not reasoning about parts or wholes.Poisoning the Well: This is a wrong answer. Jacobs is speaking after Sloan has spoken, so he cannot be attempting to discredit in advance what she will be saying (in this context).Straw Man: This is the right answer. Jacobs is presenting an extremely distorted view of Sloan's position and trying to treat it as if it were Sloan's when he argues against the bill.Appeal to Fear: This is a wrong answer. While Jacobs probably hopes that people will be afraid of the bill, his "reasoning" rests primarily on his distortion of Sloan's position.Jacobs is speaking after Sloan, not before.3