A TV ad claiming that America’s future is in Miami because it has what the world wants is an example of which fallacy?

The claim that America’s future is in Miami because it has what the world wants exemplifies the non sequitur fallacy. In this type of fallacy, the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. The assertion attempts to link Miami's qualities directly to America's future viability without providing a clear rationale or evidence to justify that connection.

A non sequitur presents an argument in which the premises, even if true, do not provide adequate support for the conclusion drawn. In this case, just stating that Miami has what the world wants does not logically guarantee that America’s future depends on or is secured by this assertion. The reasoning is flawed because it skips necessary steps and fails to consider other factors that contribute to America's future, making the argument unconvincing.

The other choices presented involve different types of logical issues, but they do not address the nature of the argument made in the ad as effectively as the non sequitur does. Thus, focusing on the disconnect between expectation and conclusion steers us back to recognizing the non sequitur fallacy in this scenario.