“The people want it”

References

1. Anderson, C.
   1979 The place of principles in policy analysis. The American Political Science Review, 73(3), 711–723. 10.2307/1955399
   https://doi.org/10.2307/1955399 [Google Scholar]
2. Andone, C.
   2015 Engagement et non-engagement dans les appels à la majorité par des hommes politiques. Argumentation et analyse du discours, 15, 13pp. Retrieved from: https://aad.revues.org/2021#tocto1n3
   [Google Scholar]
3. Andone, C.
   2016 Argumentative patterns in the political domain: The case of European parliamentary committees of inquiry. Argumentation, 30, 45–60. 10.1007/s10503‑015‑9372‑4
   https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-015-9372-4 [Google Scholar]
4. Buruma, I.
   4September 2019 Britain’s enemy of the people?Project Syndicate. Retrieved from: https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/boris-johnson-enemy-of-the-people-by-ian-buruma-2019-09
   [Google Scholar]
5. Cook, F. Lomax , Barabas, J. , and Page, B. I.
   2002 Invoking public opinion. Policy elites and social security. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 235–264. 10.1086/340025
   https://doi.org/10.1086/340025 [Google Scholar]
6. Copi, I. M. , and Cohen, C.
   1990 Introduction to Logic, 8th ed.New York/London: Macmillan.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Dedrick, D.
   2019 Is an appeal to popularity a fallacy of popularity?Informal Logic, 39(2), 147–167. 10.22329/il.v39i2.5101
   https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v39i2.5101 [Google Scholar]
8. van Eemeren, F. H.
   2010 Strategic manoeuvring in argumentative discourse. Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.2
   https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2 [Google Scholar]
9. van Eemeren, F. H. , Garssen, B. , and Meuffels, B.
   2009 Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness. Empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑90‑481‑2614‑9
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2614-9 [Google Scholar]
10. van Eemeren, F. H. and Grootendorst, R.
    1992 Argumentation, communication and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJetc.: Erlbaum Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
11. van Eemeren, F. H. , and Grootendorst, R.
    2004 A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
12. van Eemeren, F. H. , and Snoeck Henkemans, A. F.
    2016 Argumentation: Analysis and evaluation (2nd rev. ed.) New York/London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315401140
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315401140 [Google Scholar]
13. Ellwanger, A.
    2017 Reinventing doxa: public opinion polling as deliberative discourse. Argumentation and Advocacy, 53(3), 181–198. 10.1080/00028533.2017.1337330
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2017.1337330 [Google Scholar]
14. Fishkin, J. S.
    2009 When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Gallup, G. and Rae, S. F.
    1968 The pulse of democracy. The public-opinion poll and how it works. New York: Greenwood Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Godden, D.
    2008 On common knowledge and ad populum: Acceptance as grounds for acceptability. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 41(2), 101–129. 10.1353/par.0.0000
    https://doi.org/10.1353/par.0.0000 [Google Scholar]
17. Govier, T.
    2010 A practical study of argument, 7th ed. (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth). Retrieved from: www.kalabakas.dk/files/Books/A%20Practical%20Study%20of%20Argument.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
18. de Gruyter, C.
    31August 2019 Democratische schade door referendum (Democratic damage through referendum). NRC Handelsblad, p.10. Retrieved from: https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/08/30/democratische-schade-door-referendum-a3971694
    [Google Scholar]
19. Gutman, A. and Thompson, D.
    2004 Why deliberative democracy?Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press. 10.1515/9781400826339
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400826339 [Google Scholar]
20. Harrison, T. R.
    1995 Are public opinion polls used illegitimately? 47% say yes. In S. Jackson (Ed.), Argumentation and Values: Proceedings of the Ninth SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Holzinger, K. , Reinhard, J. , and Biesenbender, J.
    2014 Do arguments matter? Argumentation and negotiation success at the 1997 Amsterdam Intergovernmental Conference. European Political Science Review, 6(2), 283–307. 10.1017/S1755773913000064
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773913000064 [Google Scholar]
22. Hornikx, J.
    2013 Een Bayesiaans perspectief op argumentkwaliteit. Het ad populum-argument onder de loep. [A Bayesian perspective to argument quality. The ad populum argument under scrutiny]. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 35(2), 128–143. 10.5117/TVT2013.2.HORN
    https://doi.org/10.5117/TVT2013.2.HORN [Google Scholar]
23. Herman, T. & Oswald, S.
    (forthcoming). Everybody knows that there is something odd about ad populum arguments. In R. Boogaart , H. Jansen , & M. van Leeuwen Eds. The language of argumentation. Cham: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Jansen, H.
    2019 De invloed van het standpunt op de beoordeling van ad populum-argumentatie [The role of the standpoint in the assessment of ad populum argumentation]. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 41, 143–157. 10.5117/TVT2019.1.010.JANS
    https://doi.org/10.5117/TVT2019.1.010.JANS [Google Scholar]
25. Jansen, H. and van Leeuwen, M.
    2021 The presentational dimension of Geert Wilders’s populist argumentative style. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 10(1). 10.1075/jaic.20020.jan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.20020.jan [Google Scholar]
26. Johnson, R. H. , and Blair, J. A.
    2006 Logical Self-Defense. New Yorketc.: Idea Press.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Kahane, H.
    1984, Logic and contemporary rhetoric: the uses of logic in everyday life (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Kienpointner
    2003 Populistische Topik. Zu einigen rhetorischen Strategien Jörg Haiders. Rhetorik, 21(1), 119–140.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Minot, W. S.
    1981 A rhetorical view of fallacies: Ad hominem and ad populum. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 11, 222–235. 10.1080/02773948109390615
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02773948109390615 [Google Scholar]
30. Mudde, C. , and Rovira Kaltwasser, C.
    2017 Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/actrade/9780190234874.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780190234874.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
31. Müller, J. W.
    2016 What is populism?Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 10.9783/9780812293784
    https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812293784 [Google Scholar]
32. Nolt, J. E.
    1984 Informal logic. Possible worlds and imagination. New York,etc.: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 10.22329/il.v6i2.2728
    https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v6i2.2728 [Google Scholar]
33. Oswald, S. , and Hart, C.
    2013 Trust based on bias: Cognitive constraints on source-related fallacies. In D. Mohammed and M. Lewínski (Eds.), Virtues of Argumentation. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22–26 May 2013. Windsor, ON: OSSA, 13pp.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Rawls, J.
    1999 A theory of justice (Revised edition). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Reisigl, M.
    2006 The dynamics of right-wing populist argumentation in Austria. In: F. H. van Eemeren , J. A. Blair , C. A. Willard and B. Garssen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA). Amsterdam: Rozenberg.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Shapiro, R. Y.
    2011 Public opinion and American democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(5), 982–1017. 10.1093/poq/nfr053
    https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfr053 [Google Scholar]
37. Skinner, G.
    4September 2019 An election is on the cards. So what do the polls tell us?The Guardian. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/04/election-polls-boris-johnson-jeremy-corbyn
    [Google Scholar]
38. Taggart, P.
    2000 Populism. Buckingham/Philadelphia: Open University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Tindale, C. W.
    2007 Fallacies and argument appraisal. Cambridgeetc.: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511806544
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511806544 [Google Scholar]
40. Toulmin, S. , Rieke, R. D. , and Janik, A.
    1984 An introduction to reasoning. Macmillan: University of California.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Walton, D. N.
    1992 The place of emotion in argument. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Walton, D. N.
    1999 Appeal to popular opinion. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Walton, D. N.
    2006 Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Walton, D. N. , Reed, C. , and Macagno, F.
    2008 Argumentation schemes. Cambridgeetc.: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511802034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034 [Google Scholar]
45. Weale, A.
    2018 The will of the people. A modern myth. Cambridge/Madford: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Yankelovich, D.
    1991 Coming to public judgment. Making democracy work in a complex world. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
    [Google Scholar]