Anyone but Obama in 2012

In I would never ever vote for Obama. I rather vote for romney or even rick perry than obama in 2012. I use this page as proof.

http://answers.yahoo.com...

The people that says anyone but obama gets most thumbs up and more thumbs up means your right. that means Hitler or even bieber> obama.

Since my opponent wants to argue "anyone but Obama." I will choose 2 anyones (since going over 100's would be argument abuse).

The two I choose are Hitler and Stalin. My opponent must argue that both Hitler and Stalin would be better presidents. I'll let my opponent start.

Hitler and Stalin are bad choices but I guess they would do. Hitler is already better than obama. He didn't allow universal health care and is a nice conservative. He only did one thing wrong and that was rasicism but obama is racist as well.

Stalin and obama are same people. Both are evil and both are moronic liberals! ANYONE BUT OBAMA IN 2012!

My opponent gives no reasoning as to why Stalin would be a better option. He says that Stalin and Obama are the same (I would be willing to argue that they are not, both in reality and in policy, but that can be for a different debate), if they are the same (as my opponent suggested), then one is not a better option then the other. Based on that alone, but opponent concedes the debate.

But I will still address the Hitler comments. My opponent seems to believe that universal healthcare is worse than holocaust/attempted world domination/aggresive racism. I ask my opponent what moral measuring stick is he using to reach that conclusion? I would also like to ask for proof that Obama is a racist of significant degree (meaning actually holding that one race is superior and should be promoted above others).

As such, the deaths of over 40 million people as direct results of Hitler's policies and the theft of billions of dollars from Jewish citizens to help fund their wars outweigh the universal health care that Obama managed to pass in 99.99% of moral systems.

Well it is because Stalin hasn't damage the country with his ways in econ anyway while obama has. We owe 4 billion to china alone. I will be truthful and say it isn't just his fault. It it bush as well but he all ready has spent more than bush has. Stalin never put his country in that much debt but he was not prefect. Infact he is insane and one of the worst men ever.But he wasn't as bad as Obummer. BTW i learn my debate skills and got my facts from yahoo answers!

My opponent has dropped the Hitler side so those points move on. Stalin's policies, while not putting putting the country into debt, resulted in the deaths of millions of his own citizens, many murdered by the government itself. A continuation policies later resulted in a total collapse of the USSR. While some might argue that a collapse of the US federal government resulting in 50 independent states, would be a good thing, this is not what my opponent argued, and it is certainly not worth the millions of deaths that came with it.

He has still not provided what ethical measuring stick he chooses to use. With that, I turn this back over to him for his final round.

But obummer lies! He hasn't shown his grades from college or where he was born. He was really born in kenya! Obummer sucks. Plain view! Your a stupid liberal! This whole site is full of them. My friends on yahoo answers told me this and they were right. Yahoo answers is alot better than this site! Yahoo answers taught me real views and how to be a better person and about the lies about obama. YOU LIE!

My opponent has not refuted any of the arguements. He has not shown how Hitler, nor Stalin wound be better options than Obama in 2012.

This could have been very easy for him, since both Hitler and Stalin are dead, electing them would put the VP in charge, which was left open. My opponent could have slipped Ron Paul as the VP, and so get to argue that Ron Paul would be better than Obama. Or, he could have argued that a corpse, that would technically pocket veto everything, would shrink the size of the federal government and argue that that is good according to libertarian or conservative beliefs for government.

However, he did not. Since all my points went un-refuted, despite being fairly simple to get around, they all hold.

Thank you,