Fallacies 2

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-shutdown-stunt-is-an-act-of-needless-stupidity/2018/12/21/5567582c-0551-11e9-b6a9-0aa5c2fcc9e4_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.40ec75068252

One-Sidedness: In the article, several words and pieces of evidence suggest that the article is highly one-sided. The evidence presented about Trump's decision to shut down the government is presented in a negative way to convey that he was entirely wrong to do so. There was no evidence to support that what he was doing had any sort of benefits for anyone. The article refers to the situation as the "worst instincts of a bad president". Therefore, the lack of an objective view and the absence of acknowledgement for anything other than the government shutdown was bad makes this article suffer from one-sidedness.

Appeal to Consequences: Several times throughout the article, it references the government shutdown in a bad light. It specifically mentions that Trump's government shutdown has caused harm to a lot of government workers, and because of that, his goal of making border security more efficient will be hindered because the government shutdown will result in Customs and Border Protection workers being unpaid, and therefore negatively effected. This is shown when the article states"Nothing better illustrates the needless stupidity of the shutdown than Mr. Trump's claim to be taking a stand for border security when one of the agencies being caught up is Customs and Border Security". Belief in having a government shutdown results in unpaid workers and hinders productivity, so the government shutdown is entirely wrong according to this article.