In the argument about arms deals, what is a straw man argument?

A straw man argument occurs when someone misrepresents an opponent's stance, making it easier to attack or refute. In the context of the argument about arms deals, misrepresenting the opponent's position on foreign policy serves this purpose by simplifying and distorting their actual viewpoint. This allows the individual making the straw man argument to argue against an exaggerated version of the opponent's claims rather than addressing the argument directly. For instance, if one party claims that arms deals are necessary for national security, a straw man might portray this as the idea that the opponent advocates for unlimited and irresponsible weapon sales, which is not their actual position.

The other choices do not fit the definition of a straw man argument. Criticizing the President for arms deals reflects a direct engagement with the argument rather than misrepresentation. Arguing about street parties pertains to a different topic entirely, and claiming regarding a child's inherent nature does not involve a mischaracterization of an opponent's argument or position in a debate.