Instigator / Con
0
1526
rating
5
debates
70.0%
won
Topic
#1434

President Donald Trump should not be re-elected in 2020

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
0
Better sources
0
0
Better legibility
0
0
Better conduct
0
0

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
20,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
0
1485
rating
91
debates
46.15%
won
Description

Virtuoso argues that Donald Trump should not be re-elected in 2020.

-->
@Barney

I just now noticed your RFD. Sorry you didn't get time to actually post that in your vote.

Regarding "URL shorteners," I often archive certain sources because sometimes the original source gets edited or deleted which still lets the archived source be seen, or if the original source is one that requires a monthly fee or registration/subscription to view, and having an archive lets you bypass those. Also because URL shorteners allow me to save characters. Like if a certain source is like: http:www.website.com/ejofa8ojff0q98urjifjoufiheiaofueohiafhoeuhaoifuehoaufiopaeruhuorhwuiohg3uwhpou9ghu

That is a ridiculously long link so I shorten it with something like http:archive/asdfgh

---RFD (1 of 4)---
Sorry you guys did not get votes in on time. This is too little too late, but better late than never...

Interpreting the resolution:
Straight forward, except for the odd double negative in the resolution.

Gist:
Both dropped so much... And so many other bits were just not relavent (both wanted to talk about Obama for example, which there was only one instance where I saw the relevance) So when I read this, I was taking Chris seriously, and then it was revealed that apparently Trump defeated ISIS, which Clinton (not even Bill who was president, but Hillary... WTF?) and Obama created. This is just so mind boggling, that I don’t know if I should re-read the whole thing with a comedic tone or not? Shortly thereafter a source which specifically says no Hillary Clinton did not sell guns to ISIS was used by him as proof that she sold guns to them... Anyway, grading this via a breakdown of the key points below...

0.
While the 7 page google doc actually fit within the character limit, it was a bit of a bad source. On the first page launching a complaint about how wrong it was for Virt to welcome Bill, it harmed the credibility of the rest. Then it attacked the very resolution, rather than waiting for any points tied to it. Attacking sources on an external doc, without copying the links, requires that this debate have how many separate windows? Pretty swiftly complaining news site lets you view their story but is trying to get people to sign up for memberships (but you can still view the content, so why does it matter?). All this said, want to just judge the in debate content, and let trust that Chris will respond, but it too swiftly became clear he did not. Not responding to things because you responded outside of the debate, doesn’t respond to them. You could copy/paste your previous responses even.

1. Observations
The debate is not about Obama or Clinton. Ok. Granted, Virt gave up a major advantage here, in that he otherwise could have pointed to any better republican candidate.

2. dementia
Trump doesn’t even know who the speaker of the house is when talking about them. This is pretty damning. While it could be things other than dementia, it remains a problem which if not damning, should be concerning to anyone.

3. Tweets
So on this Chris had the complaint that they were unsourced in the prior debate. In this one, they are sourced, but Chris refuses to address them when updated, leaving them dropped. Plus to deny global warming is one thing, but to say we should leverage it to prevent the cycle of winter, is terrifying.

4. Impeachable Offenses
A. “Trump knowingly asked a foreign government to investigate Biden and threatened to withhold foreign aid if they didn't.” Chris twists this around, but doesn’t actually challenge the facts of the situation, even citing Trump’s own words that he did knowingly did this.
B. “Trump's refusal to divest from his company and encourage foreign governments to visit his property.” Chris cites the law on it, which “prohibits federal officeholders from receiving any gift, payment, or other thing of value from a foreign state or its rulers, officers, or representatives.” So according to Chris, this is blatantly violated. As for the tax returns, pro did not convince me that it’s an issue. (not going to remark on the 22 confusion)
C. With the mention of Bill Clinton, I am moving on (we all get tempted to point out hypocrisy, but it’s actually a bit of an off topic Kritik).

5. Donald Trump should be re-elected in 2020
Side note: “Sean Hannity of Fox News also explains President Donald Trump's accomplishments that the media won't talk about” nice joke, but declaring that Fox News secretly isn’t really part of the media, is wholly senseless.
Responding to being accused of Gish Galloping, by transcribing the Gish Gallop, is not enduring. Chris, Virt asked you to just pick the best of from those sources, he did not say you must also include the negative (you are right in that part being his job).

Side note: Virt, while I understand the rhetoric tactic of talking down on Nixon, the man founded the EPA! Even in this debate, part of your argument against Trump is for environmental reasons; just imagine if the EPA were not an obstacle? ... And again, this debate is about Trump, not anyone else.

A. Economic boom, but apparently, we’re in a manufacturing recession (even if a slight one, that’s still not the reported boom).
The economy was already good, as shown with the deficit apparently being cut in half, to more than doubling again (light skimming of the article).
B. Trump’s policy against the Kurds helped ISIS... This area is addressed up top, I am going to try to ignore this one.
C. Chris insists Trump built the wall, and because Trump wrote a Tweet which says Mexico is paying for it, it must be true... Virt used the canceled projects which we would otherwise be doing to prove that we are indeed paying, and it is not built yet.

---

Arguments:
See above review of key points.
Trump hurt the economy; when his economic impact was cited as good for us. He doesn’t know who the Speaker of the House is, because his mind is slipping; that many of us would like for her to not be, doesn’t change the problem. He complains of the shortage on global warming; Chris could have said he was mocking the concept, but instead he defended that we should embrace it, which to get rid of winter would intuitively result in fatal summers... These core aspects, all weigh in favor of Virt.

Sources:
While sources sometimes have ease of access problems, none of these seemed overwhelming, and both sides indeed put in their full research efforts. I will say that I have a pet peeve against URL shorteners, as I like to know at a glance what to expect (university education...).

Conduct:
Neither distracted from the debate with a bunch of insults. While I note the Gish Gallop, it shifts the point but does not wholly move it enough alone.

S&G:
Mainly, see point 0 above.

Saying 'here is my argument' and not making an argument but instead linking other peoples arguments should honestly be grounds for awarding conduct points.

-->
@Christen

Crap. I mis copied my word document.

-->
@Christen

Good luck, my dude.

-->
@David

I am going to spam you. You better not forfeit.

-->
@Christen

Good luck!