Answer:
Nadia Arumugam will completely agree with this cartoon because she clearly stated that 'no one is completely banned from taking unlimited amounts of soda since they are not restricted from ordering two or more bottles of soda if they so desire'.
Explanation:
In the cartoon the picture of a man drinking a giant-sized soda before the ban, was compared to him after the ban buying two cans of soda. There was clearly no difference between the two because the objective of the ban which was to reduce obesity was defeated. The man remained obese.
This is in line with Nadia's argument that the ban does not prevent anyone from drinking an unlimited amount of soda since they could simply buy two or more cans if they so desire.
The rhetorical appeals that Chisholm used in her campaign speech are:
<h3>What is a Speech?</h3>
This refers to the public speaking done by a person to a group of people to convey an idea to them to convince them of something.
Hence, we can see that Chisolm used rhetorical appeals such as logos to show that she was showing that she was capable to run for president of America and that while being a black woman, she did not represent blacks or women, but was a candidate of America.
Read more about Chisholm's speech here:
brainly.com/question/11430407
#SPJ1
I believe an outline is all of the above, it can help explain words, organize important text and act as notes for the important pieces of the story. Let me know if this helps any or if you need more help.
