Legislator: My colleague says we should reject this act because it would deter investment. But because in the past she voted for legislation that inhibited investment, this surely is not the real reason she opposes the act. Since she has not revealed her real reason, it must not be very persuasive. So we should vote to approve the act. The reasoning in the legislator 's argument is most vulnerable to the criticism that the argument ["presumes, without providing justification, that the colleague's opposition to the act is the minority position in the legislature", "fails to consider that the colleague's opposition to the act may be a response to constituents' wishes", 'treats a personal character trait as if it were evidence of the professional viewpoint of the person having that trait', 'fails to address the grounds on which the colleague claims the act should be rejected']