Instigator / Pro
21
1350
rating
29
debates
20.69%
won
Topic
#2719

It's Official: White Americans Are Domestic Terrorists: Prove Me Wrong

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
18
Better sources
8
12
Better legibility
6
6
Better conduct
4
6

After 6 votes and with 21 points ahead, the winner is...

Barney
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
8,001
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
42
1810
rating
49
debates
100.0%
won
Description

It's been a minute since I've posted, but I couldn't let this opportunity go to waste. White-Domestic Terrorists stormed government buildings today in D.C., which is an act of terrorism. I've debated this topic on many occasions and have literally destroyed every opponent because my arguments are based on facts and my arguments are proven in real time. The hypocrisy of white people is being proved as we speak because these are the same people who support racist cops who shoot unarmed, nonthreatening Black people. As today's "coup" took place, not a single shot was fired at the white terrorists, which further proves my point. We all know that the European race are global terrorists because history proves it, but I'll just stick to their terrorism here in the US for this debate.

This debate is more so of proving that white Americans aren't domestic terrorists. My opponent will need to prove that white Americans aren't hypocrites when it come to law/order. Punishment for the terroristic acts today should be discussed etc,......"If you can't stand the heat, then get..............."

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:

Argument: Pro's resolution and consistent argument was that all whites are terrorists, and claims, furthermore, that this claim is "official," i.e., that it is the conclusion of FBI investigation into the incident at the Capitol in 1/6, and that all participants in the incident were domestics. The FBI has not yet concluded the investigation, and neither conclusion offered by Pro has been determined yet. Con successfully refuted the claims, plus argued successfully that race is not a linking, determining factor with today's terrorism problem. point to Con

Sources. Pro offered sourcing only in round 2. The first does not link the attempt to kidnap MI's governor specifically to "white supremacists," although that subject is discussed. The second source claimed that in some 30-plus domestic terror incidents, "25 of 46" terrorists were white supremacists, yet pro's argument claims this is a 100% issue. pro's own source proves his resolution false. Con's's sources support his argument fully. points to Con.

S&G. Tie

Conduct: Pro's attitude toward Con is harsh and challenging throughout. Con remains respectful throughout. points to Con

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:

because con is not racist

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:

All this really showed was pro's blatant racism.

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:

Overall Pro simply did not have any rebuttals to the arguments presented by Con. Pro took a position that could not be supported in logic or in evidence. I did notice a couple of spelling mistakes by Con. Yet even within that he was able to present a much clearer position.

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:

As implied by the resolution, and argued by Con, it is unreasonable to claim that proving a small minority of white Americans as domestic terrorists fulfills Pro's burden of proof for his resolution. Whereas Con has provided explicit evidence of the fact that a very small percentage of domestic terrorists are not white, therefore Con easily wins this debate.

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:

It's obvious. Pro could've won if he said "white americans can be domestic terrorists", but obviously white americans aren't majorly domestic terrorists as laid out by con.