Instigator / Pro
Points: 5

Devin Nunes

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 4 votes the winner is ...
oromagi
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Politics
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
Points: 28
Description
God's gift to the civil courtroom
Round 1
Forfeited
Published:
Thanks, ramdatt!

THBT: DEVIN NUNES is GOD's GIFT to the CIVIL COURTROOM

PRO has forfeited the opening round, forcing CON to define the term of this debate

DEFINITIONS:

DEVIN NUNES is the U.S. Representative for California's 22nd congressional district, Trump stooge, and ranking minority-party member of the House Intelligence Committee during the 2019 impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump while corruptly failing to disclose his presence in some of the meetings and on some of the  phone calls under investigation. 

GOD is "conceived of as the supreme being, creator deity, and principal object of faith.  God is usually conceived as being omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), omnipresent (all-present) and as having an eternal and necessary existence.  God is most often held to be incorporeal (immaterial).
In agnosticism, the existence of God is deemed unknown or unknowable.  Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God"

GIFT is "something given to another voluntarily, without charge"

CIVIL COURT is "court dealing with cases in civil law"


BURDEN of PROOF:

Wikipedia advises:

"When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo."

CON interprets the resolution to mean that PRO must prove that God has voluntarily offered Nunes to some civil court

ARG 1.1  PRO MUST PROVE GOD EXITS

ARG 1.2  PRO MUST CREDIBLY ESTABLISH KNOWLEDGE/INSIGHT INTO GOD's INTENTIONS REGARDING NUNES and SOME CIVIL COURT(S) SOMEWHERE

CONCLUSION

Since CON expects that PRO will be unwilling or unable to prove GOD, PRO's thesis must fail

CON looks forward to PRO's R2 reply

SOURCES

Round 2
Published:
Devin Nunes is really a child who needs attention from his mommy.

Too bad he has become a burden on society.
Published:
THBT: DEVIN NUNES is GOD's GIFT to the CIVIL COURTROOM

PRO has forfeited the opening round

ARG 1.1  PRO MUST PROVE GOD EXITS

  • PRO has made no reply

ARG 1.2  PRO MUST CREDIBLY ESTABLISH KNOWLEDGE/INSIGHT INTO GOD's INTENTIONS REGARDING NUNES and SOME CIVIL COURT(S) SOMEWHERE

  • PRO has made no reply
COUNTER 2.1

  • Devin Nunes is really a child who needs attention from his mommy
  • Too bad he has become a burden on society.
    • Is there anything less useful in an emergency than a corrupt politician?

CONCLUSION

  • PRO has failed to prove that God has voluntarily offered Nunes to some civil court
VOTING

  • PRO barely engaged in this debate, offered no organized argument, no sources, insufficient spelling and grammar to judge and bad conduct by forfeit
  • CON would like to thank ramdatt for the GIFT
  • Thanks to all VOTERS for their kind consideration
SOURCES



Added:
--> @fauxlaw
the longer the streak, the greater the fall
Contender
#10
Added:
--> @oromagi
Are you getting tired of winning, yet? Nope, keep it up
#9
Added:
--> @Trent0405, @Ragnar, @fauxlaw
Many thanks for voting!
Contender
#8
Added:
This ultra rightwing website is so humble They call themselves...
BEST ONLINE DEBATING SITE
If that is true, we are in deep trouble!
Instigator
#7
Added:
prisoner+Minoan island+famous Rodin
Contender
#6
Added:
Debateart.com should be renamed to...
TRUMP ARSE KISSERS UNITED
Instigator
#5
Added:
oromagi
You do a great job copying and pasting from Wikipedia...
Congratulations...
Too bad you live in an alternate universe where all you do is worship that useless person in the White House.
Instigator
#4
Added:
One of these days, User_2006 will stop obsessing over the top debater and actually add something meaningful to a debate.
Instigator
#3
Added:
For Devin Nunes...
Suing isn't everything, it is the only thing
Instigator
#2
Added:
Gosh, it seems so strange having the top debater debating so much at once consider most of the time the one with the most potential is also the one quiet. It just seems strange.
#1
#4
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Virtually an FF, laziness and Round 1 forfeit from Pro give Con the conduct.
Pro doesn't address anything in Con's arguments, in fact he makes it clear that this debate was intended as satire on the part of Pro. While playing devil's advocate is acceptable, it's not acceptable to completely break out of character and virtually concede like that.
Only Con used sources.
#3
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Argument: Pro offered virtually no argument, but for libelous attack against Nunes. Conoffered reasoned arguments. points to Con
Sources: Pro offered no sources. Con, well eresearched and cited sources. Points to Con
S&G: The sheer volume of Con's arguments offered greater risk of S&G error. Points to Con
Conduct: Pro: disrespect to Nunes, for wasting Con's time with a debate Pro clearly instigated, but to which contributed noting of a positive argument to support his case, and to me for having to review childish slurs.
#2
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
The only real subject this debate came down to was the age of the guy. Pro asserts he's a child, con proves (with sources) he is middle aged. Conduct for forfeiture.
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Pro dropped all of Con's points without making a legitimate argument himself. So Con wins arguments.
Conduct to Con because Pro forfeited.