Instigator / Pro
11
1551
rating
26
debates
57.69%
won
Topic
#2967

The Electoral College should be abolished

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
12
Better sources
6
8
Better legibility
4
4
Better conduct
1
4

After 4 votes and with 17 points ahead, the winner is...

fauxlaw
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
28
1702
rating
77
debates
70.13%
won
Description

Definitions:

ELECTORAL COLLEGE: The Electoral College is a body of electors established by the United States Constitution, which forms every four years for the sole purpose of electing the president and vice president of the United States

ABOLISHED: Formally put an end to.

Burden of Proof: Shared
PRO must prove why it should be abolished.
CON must prove why the system should stay.

I will be using my first argument from a previous debate (https://www.debateart.com/debates/1798-the-electoral-college-should-be-abolished)

-->
@Undefeatable

Re" your #4, I'll take that under advisement because I really am passionate about the subject [can't you tell?] and would appreciate a robust debate from a contrary opponent. I get your hesitation, because it is, almost, a truism, but, there is certainly plenty of argument in favor of the abolishment, and, after all, it's not like an amendment to change the convention is impossible to make happen. So far, the efforts have been clumsy. Besides, the potential of an amendment takes it out of a truistic sense, I believe.

-->
@Nevets

Thanks for voting. Good to see you back on board.

-->
@Barney
@ILikePie5

Thanks for voting, guys.

-->
@Undefeatable

Thanks for voting

-->
@Undefeatable

This wasn't my debate as initiator, although, I did challenge something like it a few months ago. It died without acceptance. But, being a constitutional matter, I was easily hooked. I disagree about the weird. And I may just try proposing it, after giving this one a rest. And, who knows, maybe my opponent will rise to the occasion for the last round...

-->
@fauxlaw

I would've stopped after round 2. I think you should retry this debate against someone else. Not me. I find both sides very weird/hard to argue.

-->
@Barney
@Undefeatable

I fear for my opponent's abolished interest in this debate... any interest in somehow usurping it?
Ragnar, thoughts?

Just kidding to both of you. Just getting a little lonely out here. I'll plod on. One round to go.

-->
@PoliceSheep

I did not realize until responding to your friend request that you are British. I recognize and revere the foundation of our Constitution on the great legal tradition of Great Britain. My own ancestry, though deeply American [my first ancestor to arrive in America was in 1625, to Boston, from Scotland] is rooted there, and then France before the 12th century.
Anyway, I look forward to our debate.

-->
@PoliceSheep

if no one else takes this I may be interested.