Fallacies abound

The following is a quote from a front page article by Dennis Yusko in the Albany Times Union of January 26, 2014.

“Saratogians Against Vegas-style Expansion (SAVE) is a collection of residents and activists who think a full-scale casino would upset the character of the city. Their mantra is that while the casino amendment passed with 57 percent of the statewide vote, 58 percent of city voters rejected it.     The vote tally was 4,725 to 3,393 in a city of nearly 27,000 people.”

This is a clear example of fallacious reasoning.

First, the 58% of locals who rejected the casino amendment were voting on an item which was statewide. The vote was not about casinos in Saratoga alone. To take this data and use it as if it was about Saratoga alone is clearly fallacious. The statewide vote results say nothing about how Saratoga feels about a local casino.

If there had been a vote about a Saratoga casino, the result would probably be quite different. Saratoga people could have voted against the amendment out of a fear that casinos within the state could draw customers away from their community, and hurt the local economy. That stance is not even acknowledged by SAVE.

In addition, the turnout in a local vote could be appreciably higher than in the amendment vote. Or maybe not. No one knows. So to make any claims about such a vote (which SAVE seems to be doing) is not good.

SAVE must do a better job or their arguments will fail.

Advertisements