pg. 596, line 3 - “Repealing birthright citizenship is a terrible idea. It will unquestionably jeopardize the electoral future of the gop by alienating Hispanics-the largest minority and fastest-growing segment of the U.S Population. More importantly, ending birthright citizenship would fundamentally change what it means to be an American.”
I think Chavez knows that her audience is white businessmen, who already dislike immigrants, plus she already stated people dislike immigrants.
Politicians use the unpopularity to illegal immigrants as fuel for their campaigning fire. securing votes by promising illegals will be sent away.
She argues the fourteenth amendment was passed after the civil war to guarantee citizenship to freed slaves, and that it was never intended to grant citizenship from birth on U.S soil. Chavez also uses a generalized racism when she brings up the chinese during times of assimilation into American culture, many hated the chinese. The most significant historic point Chavez includes, is the U.S v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898. This is significant because even though people hated the Chinese, the Supreme Court ruled that no matter where your parents citizenship resides, if you are born in America or in our territories, you are guaranteed rights. This creates a solid argumentative essay, simply by using a large potion of evidence.…show more content… A wider range of research will ALWAYS strengthen an argumentative essay. It adds more evidence in your case.
In paragraph 5, Daines adds his achievements and qualifications to show his knowledge on the subject. He does this to convince his audience that since he is knowledgeable, that they should listen to him.
In paragraph 10, Daines uses logical analogies to create a very convincing essay, it allows the reader to think on the
