We will strike so hard that we’ll surely be true!
The reader is warned about the unpleasant consequences of disagreeing with the proponent.
You’d better agree with the company’s new policy if you want to keep your job. (That policy is still in conflict with my contract clauses, hence opposing it doesn’t breach the contract but enforces it).
That subsidy is not a good option because by voting it you will provoke us into not supporting you for your reelection. (Well, I think that’s more a threat than an argument explaining why the subsidy is wrong).
To refute it
Identify both threat and proposition, and make clear that the threat is unrelated to the proposition being true or false.
Whenever the source is not referenced, both definitions and examples have been extracted from a translation of Jaime Wilson firstname.lastname@example.org based on Stephen’s Guide to the Logical Fallacies. Copyright 1995-1998 Stephen Downes. Brandon, Manitoba, Canada.
These texts have been modified by Miguel A. Lerma and now by us to adapt them -and those taken from Wikipedia- to our format.