Instigator / Pro
3
1350
rating
29
debates
20.69%
won
Topic
#1170

Trump, Blue Lives Matter & The Fallacy of America As A Nation

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
0
1

After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...

TheAtheist
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
8,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
7
1378
rating
36
debates
38.89%
won
Description

After watching the news over the past few weeks, It's becoming more evident that America is nothing more than a joke of a nation. From immigration to crooked politicians, the US can now be labelled as a true fallacy. Law enforcement is still doing dirt on camera and are still getting away with it. The blatant disrespect to each other is out of hand, and the scam that's known as blue lives matter has fully been exposed as just another American fraud. America is an empire, but it's far from great. If you asked most logical-minded people, then would totally agree that country never was great to begin with. As with all other empires throughout time, this country will come to its knees.

If you disagree with my argument, then you're more than welcome to discuss it with me. As with all my arguments, I'm simply looking to create dialogue rather than trying to win a debate.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Interpreting the resolution:
As best I can make sense of it, pro started a debate to try to prove that the USA is not a nation.

Gist:
Pro has a problem with social science, yet wants to complain about societal aspects on the basis of having cognitive dissonance (dismissing math due to disliking the results not being what he or she wants them to be...).

1. Racist Phone Calls: tie
Pro says it happens, con agrees it sometimes happens, to which pro attempts reverse psychology to insist it either does not happen at all or that every white person is always doing it. The latter makes no sense given the employment rates.
Labeling this a tie due to zero impact on the resolution (as was revealed, some statistically negligible number of people have made bad phone calls, which says nothing of the nation other than there are people in it).

2. Jobs: con
The president of the nation promised to create thousands of jobs, con points out he outperformed that promise, and pro insists it does not count as honoring a promise (to use a quick analogy, if your friend borrows $20 but pays you back $1000, pro would insist they still owe the $20). It gets pretty funny from there, such as pro insisting that Trump and Obama are secretly the same person (that would be a good debate topic)...

2. Blue Lives Matter: con
Basically, pro tries to prove not knowing the definition of fraud... Back and forth, but no attempt to reach BoP for this (if a fraud, who is defrauded and in what way?). Pro insists if a police officer is black, they don’t care, but con literally shows on their website them paying respects to a fallen black officer, to which pro insists that never happened due to pro’s cognitive dissonance not allowing it...

3. Con did not answer questions: con
“my opponent is still refusing to answer the (specific) questions that I've asked” which was pre-refuted by the questions being answered, and further refuted with this summary: “Just because you do not like my answer doesn't mean that it's not there.”
This was basically just pro asking to be penalized on conduct.

---

Arguments:
See above review of key points.

Conduct:
Pro tried to end the debate by lying about the debate content. I see this happen a lot online, seemingly because people think what actually happened in the text format can’t be verified with CTRL+F.