Huey Long was what American really needed at his time
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Huey Long was what the Nation needed at the time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMUx4AQl5tI he was authoritarian but was not brutal and helped the poor and he was planning to stop communism, he wanted something else between capitalism and communism
Neither side made a convincing argument.
Pro R1- Huey was for the common folk(unsubstantiated).
Con R1-states his confusion with the resolution.
Pro R2- FDR was good for America, Huey would've done more
Con R2- Forfeiture, CONDUCT to Pro as a result.
Pro R3-Nothing worth noting.
Con R3- America did fine without Huey.
Pro/Con R4- No noteworthy points.
Neither side went deep into why Huey was or wasn't needed, both sides best arguments would be okay if they gave me a sufficient evidence to back up their claims, e.g break down why Huey would've done more than FDR, or why/how he would make the polices irreversible.
It's only the forfeiture that implores me to vote Pro.
nice vote modding.
It's not on the voter to determine who has the BoP, correct me if I'm wrong.
It's on the debaters to prove to the voters who has the BoP, you failed to do so in my eyes RM.
Am I correct here, the COC voting guide doesn't state how i'm wrong from what I observed.
I don't even know how to begin judging this. So I won't
How did he prove the need?
how does trent explained how our arguments are tied or how Pro met his BoP at all?
opponent bad conduct forfiet just sayin
He helped the poor