The U. S. Presidential elect is not a measure to determine my safety.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.
I'm hearing this talk about being safer in such and such's America. If this person becomes POTUS or that person becomes POTUS, you will feel safer or less safe.
Common sense dictates that this is irrelevant. Now the reasons to make such statements are what they are.
To say that this is any person's America like it's one of their possessions is off putting from the start. It shows the frame of mind.
Just like I hear people now , not regularly, talking be safe , be healthy due to this current state of a pandemic like there was nothing to be safe from before.
These are just examples from a frame of mind or minds that don't view things on a whole scale basis. We can unpack this as we progress on hopefully. I'm not looking for any circular so called talking points here.
So granted, you're political, would you argue that my safety is based on oval office administration?
Please comment or send a message for questions and clarity.
So the pro case is two-fold:
1. Local crime will still happen.
2. The "my" in the resolution is pro specifically, with his unique circumstances.
It's a decent point, and then a good trap. However, con is able to navigate it.
Con leveraged the current pandemic to great effect. Pro had no effective reply to it, saying that people should just defend themselves from it, which wholly ignores that policies set by the president influence the need for said self defense.
Con further builds on hypotheticals about a disbanded police and a crazy president starting WWIII (to which con even pointed out that pro could be targeted by the draft, to which pro declared him being drafted into a war would in no way affect his safety and that referencing him directly is no no way referencing him directly... 🤦🏻♂️). To which pro replied that subjectively his feelings override reality he lives in... No, just no. Someone may declare they feel they are actually a potato salad, and it does not put them in real danger of being eaten at a picnic.
S&G for abuse of ALL CAPS.
The voters and folks alike are really under an illusion that they don't have any control over their safety ultimately .
Sad to see, not too sad as that aint me .
The voters and folks alike are really under an illusion that they don't have any control over their safety ultimately .
Sad to see, not too sad as that at me .
It's not just the presidents themselves that might affect safety... It's people's responses to them.
Directly, no. Indirectly, yes.