Some politicians are so fearful of former President Donald Trump retaking the White House that “they don’t really want to tell the full truth,” West said. “[Biden has] created the best economy that we can get. Is this the best that we can get? You don’t tell that lie to the people just for Biden to win,” West said in a clip played on CNN Sunday.
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having refuted or defeated an opponent’s proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., “stand up a straw man”) and the subsequent refutation of that false argument (“knock down a straw man”) instead of the opponent’s proposition.
You assume that West has created a straw man. He claims that the economy could be better. Whether it’s true or not is up to the reader. In order for it to be a straw man, it would have to be untrue. If it is true, then it is not a straw man.
Let’s assume that his statement is true. That the economy could be better. By treating it as untrue, you create the straw man. You then proceed to refute his assertion by listing Biden’s economic accomplishments, thus tearing down the straw man you created.
Remember, this is all dependent on whether West’s statement is true or not. If the reader thinks it true. Then it is not a straw man.
You heavily edited this after I responded, so here’s my edit. Cornell West is saying “THEY are saying this is the best economy you can get. I don’t think this is the best it can get!” The first statement, literally no one is saying that. It’s an argument he invented to argue against. It is not true. The second statement is something literally everyone agrees with. Everyone would like to be doing better financially. Cornell West made up an argument and then knocked it down with something everyone agrees with.
To be fair, I don’t think the use of the Straw Man Fallacy is appropriate concerning the economy. Because a good or bad economy is open to interpretation. But you used the term, creating a de facto “straw man.” You then refuted it. I’m not defending West or his statement. And I find it fascinating how you were able to do that. Thus, my comment.
Edit: I am not a logician. This is just how I interpreted it.