Instigator / Pro
35
1485
rating
91
debates
46.15%
won
Topic
#1357

President Donald Trump should not be reelected in 2020

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
15
0
Better sources
10
8
Better legibility
5
5
Better conduct
5
5

After 5 votes and with 17 points ahead, the winner is...

David
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
15,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
18
1294
rating
75
debates
18.0%
won
Description

I will be arguing that Trump should not be reelected in 2020. The time to argue is 2 weeks and the voting period is two weeks.

Debate Structure
R1: Opening Arguments
R2: Rebuttals
R3: Defense
R4: Close

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:

rfd in comments

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:

Con trolled.

While I will not penalize conduct for the (hopefully) sincere attempt at being entertaining, pro's strong three contention opening was never challenged; and con never attempts to make any type of warranted case (the feelings of white snowflakes, were not even shown to be improved under Trump).

Sources strongly favor pro, with an immediate highlight of the report on dementia. It set the stage for a good debate on if Trump matched those signs, and the lack of any challenge to that hamstrung any potential con case. The YouTube video of Trump recounting that he remembers being nice to someone he doesn't remember having ever met, pretty much sealed the deal. Comparatively con's best source was on employment within one demographic, but he shot himself in the foot by immediately giving credit for it to a previous president from a different political party.

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:

Con appeared to misunderstand the debate, and offered only a throw away accusation that pro challenged as unsupported, and low black unemployment.

Even if I accept these two points on their face - they still don’t address or refute the mental decline aspects that pro raised. Given that con offered no argument against these, they stand: and thus the impacts pro presented against Trumps reflection are far more substantial - thus arguments to pro.

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:

Con drops all of Pro's arguments. Con seems to misunderstand what he's arguing for, he points out how bad Trump is and why he should leave office in 2020 which merely boosts Virt's case. Some points Bill makes that do prove Trump is good are unsubstantiated like his claim about how crazy the Democrats are, this could be a decent point if he gave me evidence to prove the Democrats are bad, but he fails to do so.

If you're going to drop all of your opponents points, at least substantiate your claims.

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:

Only one person gave arguments for their side. That was Virtuoso. billbatard didn't realize he is supposed to state Trump should be re-elected in 2020. Instead of actually realizing it when Virtuoso did state it in Round 2 billbatard carried on making a case for Virtuoso