Passage Summary: An advertisement argues against voting for Sherwood because even though he says he hates taxes, taxes went up every year he was in office.

Conclusion: Voters should not reelect Sherwood because his claim of opposing higher taxes is untrustworthy.

Reasoning: During Sherwood's ten-year tenure on the city council, the council consistently voted to increase taxes every year.

Analysis: This argument commits a classic error by assuming that because a group (the council) did something, every individual in that group (Sherwood) supported it. It is entirely possible Sherwood was the lone 'no' vote on every single tax hike for a decade. The argument is a bit like blaming a single player for a team's losing streak without checking if they were actually the one scoring all the points. Look for an answer that points out the failure to consider Sherwood's specific voting record.