Difference Between Red Herring And The Straw Man Fallacy

The second half of chapter six delves into more fallacies that can hinder rational, logical thought and the open process of argumentation. This lesson helped me to understand the difference between the red herring and the straw man fallacy. I was able to understand how to recognize an ad hominem. As I read the text, it became apparent to me that I often fall victim to both the ad populum and the appeal to pity. The fallacy I found most interesting in this lesson was equivocation.
In the last lesson I was came to the realization that I encounter, and have little patience for, the straw man fallacy. As I read about the red herring I could see the similarities. The red herring can be a very effective fallacy and it is one that I quite enjoy in mystery stories. I enjoyed learning about the back story of how it got its name from technique used to train hunting dogs. A red herring was used to throw the dogs off the scent of the fox and it was up to the trainers to get the dogs to ignore the fish smell and continue to hunt the fox. I imagine that some dogs were able to refocus and some dogs did not make it past training.
I
The straw man fallacy is the act of distorting an argument but the new argument still has some relation to the original. A red herring fallacy is when a new argument is brought forth which has no basis or relation to the original. It is meant to distract from the original issue and, in fact, create a new issue on which to build a platform for debate and a premise on which the opponent will claim to have won the argument. I must remember, if I am faced with a red herring in an argument that the key is to be like the trainers who successfully kept the dogs on the trail of the fox. In this way, both the straw man and the red herring are alike, I must guide the opponent back to the original issue and make sure they