The Instigator
DboPoint
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
lua
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Are Trump supporters racist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
lua
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/16/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 743 times Debate No: 99980
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

DboPoint

Pro

Trump policy call for anti-muslim ban, and actions against Mexicans. Trump also made numerous remarks that targeted african-Americans.
Does that mean Trump supporters support his racist views and are racists themselves? Yes.
lua

Con

Sources in comments since there's a 500 character limit...

"
anti-muslim ban"
Trump's executive order doesn't even mention any countries; it cited pre-existing laws established by the Obama administration, yes, the Obama administration deemed the countries high risk, not Trump's. [1]

"Mexicans"
Trump has never targeted Mexicans, but illegal immigrants. [2]

"African-Americans"
No evidence of Trump being racist toward black people, though there is evidence of him being liberal on the topic of race. [3]
Debate Round No. 1
DboPoint

Pro

At the end of the day Trump's policies target specific groups. There is also a debate on this on http://www.DebateIsland.com...

http://www.debateisland.com...

Whether supporters admit it or not to themselves, there is a general theme that it is racist to target other ethinc groups, like muslims. Not all muslims are terrorists, and it is not fair to discrimanate against such a large part of population.
It is racist.
lua

Con

Sources in comments.

Never has Trump said all Muslims are terrorists and the executive order does not target Muslims. [1]

Not to mention the concept of 'single issue voters,' where the voter bases their decisions on the candidates' view on a single issue. So even if this so-called "Muslim ban" is what you say it is, not all Trump supporters believe it should be implemented. [2]

Plus, it is impossible to be racist against religion. Thus, the whole foundation of your argument collapses. [3]

Debate Round No. 2
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Mharman 1 year ago
Mharman
The 500 char limit is a strategy terrible debaters use to severely handicap good debaters, so that they have a harder time making an argument, or including the things great debaters often include. Examples of these are more rebuttals, more points, a deep explanation, and sources. I've had this happen to me. I still won, though, here's a link to it.
http://www.debate.org...
Posted by sbaile1940 1 year ago
sbaile1940
Trump supporters are NOT racist. You have to respect what other people think of other races, even if their wrong . And its expectable to call other people racist
Posted by TrumpFan 1 year ago
TrumpFan
It is easy to hide behind denial of accountability. The fact is that it is targeting certain races.
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
Though, as Gregg has thoroughly addressed, the travel ban is not racist, it does seem fairly intolerant of the Muslim faith. It specifically targets Muslim-dominated countries, and gives the Secretary of Homeland Security and Secretary of State the right to approve or not allow certain religious groups. Also, the reasoning behind why the seven specific countries in the executive order were chosen because of 9/11, even though none of those countries were even relatively involved with the attacks. Additionally, though the executive order is not named as such, Trump blatantly calls it the Muslim Ban.
Posted by Wisecracker 1 year ago
Wisecracker
Exactly, Greg, I agree this constant use of racism towards Donald trump and his supporters is annoying. there are racist people everywhere, to stop complaining about trump and find a way to help him. he not be helping our environment so what. We already ruined with pollution the best thing now is to fix our economy. if everyone were to help it'd be a quick and easier job but half the people in the country mock this man who has already had more success than Obama. Stop being immature and petty towards trump. Hilary didn't win it's not the end of the world.
Posted by Gregg_Hyde 1 year ago
Gregg_Hyde
Even if it was a Muslim ban, even if he targeted Mexicans, it wouldn't be racist. Mexicans are not a part of their own race and neither are Muslims. Nationality and faith, a set of beliefs, are not races. Intolerant, yes you could argue. But not racist.

Of course it isn't a Muslim ban. Of course he didn't outright target Mexicans. But yeah.
Posted by lua 1 year ago
lua
Darn, 500 character limit? I knew this was too good to be true!

1.) https://medium.com...

2.) http://www.breitbart.com...

3.) http://truthfeed.com...
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by KnightOfDarkness 1 year ago
KnightOfDarkness
DboPointluaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con gets convincing arguments. He brought up how Muslims are not a race, but a religion, so by definition even if it was a Muslim ban, it isn't targeting a race. They also brought up how he is not targeting Mexicans, but illegal immigrants. Finally, they brought up the point of single issue voters, who could have voted for Trump for a single issue that didn't deal with race. One of Pro's only arguments, which was pointing to another debate shows that most people don't think Trump voters are racist, so it seems to be counter-productive for their argument.
Vote Placed by medv4380 1 year ago
medv4380
DboPointluaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Given that there are a lot of Caucasian Muslims it was unwise of pro to use it to prove racism. Pro attempted to label all Trump voters as racist making it so con just had to provide a single counter example, single issue voters. I would also have taken voters who viewed both viable options as racist who picked who they believed to be the lesser Evil.
Vote Placed by subdeo 1 year ago
subdeo
DboPointluaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct was good by both sides. Looking at raw number of errors, Con easily had better spelling. He also made good arguments, backed them up with sources and rebutted Pro's points. Pro did not rebut.