Karin Klein, the author of Soda’s a Problem but… has presented the most convincing argument concerning the New York soda ban compared to the other two authors. The other two authors don’t defend their opinions as well as Klein does. Klein’s argument is more persuasive because it relies less on emotion and more on facts, the reasoning is more logical than the other two arguments, and because it does a better job of defending itself. Overall, the authors of Ban the Ban! and Three Cheers for the Nanny State do not present as much compelling evidence as is shown in Soda’s a Problem but… . Oftentimes, the other two arguments veer somewhat off course from their original points and lead to a topic that isn’t heavily relevant to their original claim. This is much more apparent in Ban the Ban!, where the author, near the end, states, “Remember the days when New York was a really cool and fun place to live? Me too.” The argument for Ban the Ban! Also becomes too emotional and only a few relevant facts are stated, which barely even lend much support to the author’s argument and are there mostly just to provide background information and set up the argument. In Ban the Ban!, the author states, “When Mayor Bloomberg implemented laws banning smoking in bars, parks and restaurants, that made sense.” for the first sentence. Many of the facts are stated in the first paragraph in the same manner as the one about smoking and aren’t used to support the argument. The text also states, “If