Instigator / Pro
14
1711
rating
33
debates
84.85%
won
Topic
#1643

The United States is greater than Canada.

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
6
3
Better sources
4
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
2
2

After 2 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Trent0405
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
3,500
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
11
1566
rating
29
debates
56.9%
won
Description

BoP shared

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:

I’m having some internet trouble tonight, preventing sources from loading. Thus not only is the source point not in consideration, but I am having to take each of you at your word for content... The clash on this became too much, especially within such a small character limit, so I am unable to make a properly weighted decision.

Below is the start to my analysis. I hope it is able to provide some feedback into the thinking that passes through a voters mind, to then help you do better on future debates.

1. Military
Pro talks about strength, con counters with a normative Kritik (https://tiny.cc/Kritik). Pro mitigates with review of misinterpreted source information... And then no it wasn’t... arg!

2. History
Pro tried to finish his R1 with this, and con leveraged it as bad for the US. Bigger history isn’t always greater history.

3. Econ
Pro’s highlight here ended up being how much better off the poor are. Con tentatively dropped this to try to mitigate within the society point... Pro shows that US citizens have less debt power as a percentage of their earnings.

5. Society
Canadians live longer, and are apparently more happy... Not really concerned with the leadership, as apparently it worked out to get the end metrics we’re looking at. Removing car crashes indeed doesn’t make sense, as something about US society results in more of them.

---

Arguments:
See above review of key points.

Sources:
(see top paragraph)

Conduct:
This would not be enough to tip the point, but pro, I suggest either having less contentions in R1, or a higher character limit. As an example of how to do this, agriculture's benefit is already included under economy, making it a touch of a Gish point.

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:

The voting standard in the debate is "The participant who scores the most points is declared the winner." I will use A to refer to America and C to Canada. I will say they are talking about "their country" for convenience.
Military: Pro says that A's military is more powerful and is used to protect 67 countries. Con protests that the military has killed 200,000 civilians. Pro responds that the numbers are exaggerated.
Pro
Economy: Pro cites statistics showing how A's economy is stronger. Con responds that Americans get less out of their economy and brings up healthcare as an example. However, one example is not sufficient to establish a generalized claim.
Pro
Innovation: Pro cites statistics showing how A is more innovative. Con replies that innovation can lead to job loss. Pro does not have a chance to respond.
Tie
Natural Resources: Pro shows how A has more natural resources than C. Con responds that that doesn't make a country better and can't be changed.
Tie
Tourism: Pro says that A has more tourism than C. Con replies that A is generally agreed to be a poor place for tourism.
Con
Media: Pro points out that A has a larger and better media than C. Con says that isn't necessarily a good thing because the media can promote hate. However, that would be true of both C and A.
Pro
Happiness: Both provide sources saying one country is happier than the other.
Tie
Soft Power: Pro says A has more soft power. Con says Pro provided no evidence. However, Pro did provide a source in R1.
Pro
Agriculture: Pro says that A produces the most Ag products in the world. Con points out that A and C are almost identical in Ag.
Tie
History: Both sides provide examples of how their country's history is good and the other's is not.
Tie
World leaders: Pro says that a temporary leader is bad but doesn't explain why. Con says Trump is bad but doesn't explain why.
Tie
Healthcare: Con states that A healthcare is more expensive and causes 500,000 bankruptcies annually. Pro replies that C actually has more bankruptcies and A has better health outcomes and shorter waiting times. Con says that C has better health outcomes, but drops the bankruptcies and waiting times.
Pro
Museums: Pro says A has more museums. Con says the artifacts in the museums come from conquest. Pro replies that both countries have done that and are returning the artifacts.
Tie
Measurement systems: Con says C uses metric, which is better. Pro drops it.
I think that's all of them. Pro: 5. Con: 1. Tie: 7. Pro wins arguments.
Both sides had good sources, conduct, and S&G.
Excellent debate by both sides.