The only points she makes are based on unfounded assumptions. She has no argument to attack. There is nothing to debate logically. She would be making the ap

The only points she makes are based on unfounded assumptions. She has no argument to attack. There is nothing to debate logically. She would be making the appeal to authority, except she doesn't even bother to do that. She just appeals to common sense ("you don't have to be an economist to... etc"). Edit: perhaps I should say any of her good points are overshadowed by (and mostly unrelated to) the blatant exaggerations and generalisations.