Instigator / Con
1
1483
rating
327
debates
40.21%
won
Topic
#2353

Present proof that Donald J. Trump is a racist.

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
0
2
Better legibility
0
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...

Intelligence_06
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
7
1731
rating
167
debates
73.05%
won
Description

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 continue to see this over and over again about somebody being "racist".
Well tell me how this person is being such?

Can you do it in 3 rounds or will it take 10?

If you need 15, I'll talk to Mr. Trump about legislating this website to increase its capacity for possibly stigmatizing him.

For clarity or questions, Please send a message or comment prior to accepting debate.

-->
@MisterChris

Absolute proof would depend on the definitions. Solipsism for example would deny that Trump can be known to exist. Some definitions of proof and racism could leave it as Donald Trump pretending to be racist to appeal to racist voters. However without any definitions outlined, we tend to default to everyday usage; to which strong evidence toward something is good enough to be considered proof.

No proof has been presented. I understand folks have an opinion about somebody. Separate from personal impression.

-->
@oromagi

no, seriously though. His argument in response to that is basically "Your reasons are opinions, and no opinions matters".

CON: Don't speak for the Chinese people- can you produce a single Chinese person who was actually offended by Trump's remarks?
PRO: Me. I am one offended Chinese person.
CON:https://youtu.be/Vrm8TV7K4zo

-->
@Mall

Yeah..... you've been utterly demolished. All of your rebuttals were hogwash, and when you attempted to justify a claim, you misunderstood most core premises.

https://www.debateart.com/debates/652-donald-trump-is-not-racist-change-my-mind

Donald Trump is the most prolific liar in history. The Washington Post has verified over 20,000 lies told an ever-increasing rate or repetition on social media. I generally won't accept Donald Trump as legitimate source of information of any kind, particularly on matters touching Trump's image and public perception.

"Glenn Kessler said in 2017 that in his job as a fact-checker for The Washington Post there was no comparison between Trump and other politicians. Kessler gave his worst rating to other politicians 15 percent to 20 percent of the time, but gave it to Trump 63 percent to 65 percent of the time. Kessler wrote that Trump was the most fact-challenged politician that he had ever encountered and lamented that "the pace and volume of the president's misstatements means that we cannot possibly keep up".

The Washington Post fact-checker created a new category of falsehoods in December 2018, the "Bottomless Pinocchio," for falsehoods repeated at least twenty times (so often "that there can be no question the politician is aware his or her facts are wrong"). Trump was the only politician who met the standard of the category, with 14 statements that immediately qualified. According to the Washington Post, Trump has repeated some falsehoods so many times he has effectively engaged in disinformation.

-->
@Intelligence_06

At this point I don't consider anything the media has to say about Trump remotely credible. Vice versa, I don't consider much Trump has to say at all credible.

-->
@MisterChris

The proof is so abundant that if you search up "news" you get evidence for the PRO side. I openly say this because well... it is just a big fat "ggez".

I don't think there is proof... But PRO will probably win anyway