Instigator / Pro

Bernie Sanders would be a better President than Trump.


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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
Better sources
Better legibility
Better conduct

After 3 votes and with 21 points ahead, the winner is...

Publication date
Last updated date
Number of rounds
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Contender / Con

No specific format, R1 make argument, R2 rebuttal, R3 closing.

Round 1
I'm sorry my opponent has chosen to forfeit the first round.

I Argument: Constitutional failure
I.a Taking the contender position, I will first assert that constitutionally, Bernie Sanders not only will not make a better President, but cannot make a better President than Donald Trump. Here’s why:
I.a.1 The oath of office of the President, the only oath to be constitutionally documented, declares: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."[1]
I.a.2 As an avowed Socialist [let’s not be deceived by his preferred appellation “Democratic Socialist” because all that means is that “both the economy and society should be run democratically – to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few…”[2]  What Sanders really believes is that “Both socialism and communism are essentially economic philosophies advocating public rather than private ownership, especially of the means of production, distribution and exchange of good [i.e., making money] in a society.”[3]  Sanders is wrong by either description. Bernie Sanders, as a Socialist, is a contradiction to the U.S. Constitution.
I.a.3 “Both socialism and communism are essentially economic philosophies advocating public rather than private ownership, especially of the means of production, distribution and exchange of good [i.e., making money] in a society.”[4]  However, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, who published The Communist Manifestoin 1848 Germany, quoted from just above, held that “…socialism [is] the first, necessary phase on the way to communism. Marx and Engels themselves didn’t consistently clearly differentiate communism from socialism, which helped ensure lasting confusion between the two terms.”[5]  It is claimed that under socialism, individuals still own property, but “industrial production, or the chief means of generating wealth, is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.”[6]  
I.a.4 By contrast, the U.S. Constitution, while giving power to Congress to “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,”according to the U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 8, clause 3 [and see also the balance of Section 8], ownership of industry is in the hands of the people, privately [that is, not communally] by corporations having individuals owning stock. 
I.a.5 I challenge, therefore, Bernie Sanders’ ability, if he were elected President of the United States, to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and… to the best of  [his] Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,"  which nation is founded on a free-market economy of private [as opposed to government] individually-own industries with allowance of ownership by other individuals by way of investment in publicly-traded stock, as noted in I.a.4. By this means, the American economic system allows anyone with the will, and the means, to own and profit from their investment according to their want.Whereas socialism/communism “controls all aspects of economic production, and the public receives a portion based on what they need.”[7] What they need, and have under the free-market system, is liberty, is to choose to engage in such investment, or not. Socialism, even ‘Democratic’ Socialism, offers no such liberty by its own definition [see reference [4]].
II Argument: Socialism failures
II.a Whereas the United States of America has survived as a free-market economic system for 230 years and counting, there is no socialist economic system in the world that has survived longer than did the USSR’s 74 years [1917 to 1991][8], and the typical socialist system survives about 40 years before economic collapse.[9] That is not an exemplary result for a presidency espousing a failed system when a better system has endured longer by a factor of 575%.
II.b Within the system of socialism are the seeds of its failure. Some opponents of a free-market argue, and my opponent may well argue the point in rebuttal, that the same accusation may be hurled at the free-market system. However, there is a solid rebuttal against this claim: The free market does not claim there is a limit to the money supply. In fact, it claims the opposite. A free market economy is one in which “there is unobstructed competition”and lack of “coercive restrictions in economic activity.”[10]
II.b.1Whereas, Bernie Sanders rejects this approach. Example: “The Green New Deal: The climate crisis is not only the single greatest challenge facing our country; it is also our single greatest opportunity to build a more just and equitable future, but we must act  immediately.”[11] From the Green New Deal proposal itself, we read: The transition to 100% clean energy will foster democratic control of our energy system, rather than maximizing profits for energy corporations, banks and hedge funds.”[12]  Yes, Sanders conveniently ignores the maximized profits for individual investors, as well. Further, I challenge any socialist/greenie to tell me which of every single green energy turbine on earth [wind, solar, hydro, tidal, geothermal, biomass, or nuclear for that matter] does not employ petroleum products, of which we must “act now” to eradicate to achieve net-zero emissions of GHGs, in the lubrication and fabrication of its plastic parts.
II.b.2 Second example: The Green New Deal proposal requires, Create a Commission for Economic Democracy  [note that particular description]to provide publicity, training, education, and direct financing for cooperative development and for democratic reforms to make government agencies, private associations, and business enterprises more participatory. We will strengthen democracy via participatory budgeting and institutions that encourage local initiative and democratic decision-making.”Bernie Sanders embraces this proposal, which opposes the constitutionally guaranteed operation of private industry [Article I, section 8, clause 3 To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States…”].  To “regulate,”  not to “participate” in it, such as in “participatory budgeting.” Or do we re-define what the Constitution declares emphatically just so Bernie Sanders can be constitutional? That would require a passed-by-Congress and ratified-by-States amendment to the Constitution. Sanders better get cracking. The typical constitutional amendment requires an aggregated average of seven years to reach ratification, according to an accounting of the duration of the 27 amendments efforts from proposal to ratification, not including Amendment XXVII, requiring 203 years to ratify.[13]

For just these reasons, [1] an inability to preserve, protect, ad defend the Constitution as written, and [2] due to the failure of socialism to adhere to the Constitution as written, Bernie Sanders would not, aqnd cannot be a better President than president Trump.

Round 2
As there is nothing to rebut due to the failure of my opponent to respond to my round 1, and after he has already forfeited round 1, I shall proceed to additional argument:
I Argument: What is a better President?
I.a One may well ask, given this debate proposal, what is a better President? That may be a difficult question to answer because the expectations by the American people have changed, mostly for the more difficult possibilities of a president succeeding in his expectations since George Washington first manned the post.[1] The Presidency, in Washington’s day, may not have been “the most difficult job in the world,”a common phrase by which the Presidency is known today. George Washington never dressed, and never acted like the local fire department chief. Today, and well since the presidency of Lyndon Johnson, fully nine presidencies ago, the President, among all other expanding duties, is expected to be a first responder.[2] Is Bernie Sanders up to that, turning 79 this coming September?
I.b We might look to Bernie’s own website for answers: A look at his reaction to, and suggestions for the Sanders administration’s proposed response to a crisis like this spring’s Covid-19 emergency:
            “1. Empower Medicare to Lead Health Care Response
a.             Federal funding to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
b.             Cover all health care treatment for free
c.              Increase health care capacity
a.    Increase provider capacity
b.    Implement testing models
c.     Defense Production Act mobilization
d.    Utilize the National Guard, Army Corps of Eng’rs
e.    Expand community health centers”[3]
Perhaps Bernie Sanders missed it, but these are virtually identical to the response taken, and more, by the Trump administration, much to the complaint of detracting Democrats.[4] So, what’s better about Bernie Sanders’ copycat plan, particularly since Bernie would depend on Medicare/Medicaid, whereas Trump favored a more responsive and capable partnership with private industry? Answer: nothing. Both because my opponent has not opposed it, but also because it happens to be true.
I.c We could also look to Sanders’ website [ref I.b, and round 1, II.b.1, 2] to observe his answer to “the single greatest challenge facing our country.”[Climate change] The argument in my round 1, II.b was sufficient to display Sander’s leading-from-behind response similar to Covid-19. Once again, Bernie’s response is a government solution [remember “participatory budgeting?”[5]]. Recall the famous words by President Ronald Reagan in his 1981 inaugural address, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.”[6]
I.d Bernie Sanders would be a better President than Donald Trump? Shouldn’t a better candidate precede that better President? It seems Bernie Sanders has proven to be a candidate who failed to be a better candidate than Joe Biden; the candidate who in just the past two weeks, let alone earlier gaffes, has declared, “You got more questions. If you have a problem figuring out if you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black,”[7] and, the pièce de résistance,“I’m going to beat Joe Biden.”[8] Some news outlets, such as Politifact are Biden apologists claiming that he said, “I’m going to be Joe Biden.”[9]  That’s a failed attempt at apology. If Joe Biden isn’t Joe Biden now, just who is he and when will he be Joe Biden? I suppose it is one answer to a facetious question I posed in DART Forum a few days ago: “When Joe Biden is elected, who is going to be the President?” It is a better candidate who can declare that he can overcome even himself; not that that candidate would be a better President, because we expect a President to already be himself when inaugurated.
I.e A better president shows up, and the people show up in greater numbers to greet him. I present for your sustaining vote the re-electable better President, Donald Trump.

Round 3
I. Conclusion: Bernie Sanders would not make a better President
I.a As there has been nothing to rebut due to the failure of my opponent to respond in all three rounds, and having already offered two rounds of untouched arguments, I declare victory in this debate. In spite of the failure of my opponent to make an appearance in this debate, I have and am arguing in each round of this debate why the proposal, “Bernie Sanders would be a better President than Trump,”is fallacious. I have shown Bernie Sanders would not make a better President as claimed. His socialist policies fail as they have failed in the past to sustain themselves in any enduring fashion in any country they have ever been attempted. His policies are shown to be mere shadow issues already addressed, and concluded by President Trump by means markedly unrelated to any superiority of government over private industry as a problem-solving vehicle. And I have demonstrated how the Constitution, itself, declares a duty of performance by the President that cannot be fulfilled successfully by a socialist. To even make the attempt would be a denial of the President’s oath of office.