The Instigator
zander
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points

Barack Obama

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 818 times Debate No: 2916
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (9)

 

zander

Con

I am not sure why people are voting for him. I started this debate more for informational purposes. Could an Obama supporter please tell me why you and massive amounts of others are voting for this guy? I looked at his record and his policy and can't really see it. Thanks.
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

he supports a balanced budget. please go to my profile and see the recent debates about how irresponsible it has been of regan and the bushes to cut taxes when there's no recession and there's deficit spending.

he supports targeted tax cuts to businesses who will support the economy. AND he supports repealing the tax loop holes, especially capital gains. this is because people like warren buffet pay seventeen percent of their income in taxes while his secretary who makes sixty k pay like thirty percent. the rich don't need capital gain etc tax cuts as an enticement to create passive investment income. focusing our tax assistance to targeted individuals would help much much more.

he supports progressive taxes, which is a long post in itself for why this is the fairest most realistic situation.

he goes overboard i'd agree, but he supports roe v wade, which has helped women with rape and life exceptions. republicans mindless say they want to repeal roe, but that would only mean the states could put a woman in jail for fifty years for trying to save her life when both were going to die.

he's for keeping social security. now, it's good to privatise most of it. especially with the rich. but, with the poorer, they dont' save enough to retire on. hte fact that social security pays out more than they paid in would help them. the rich, that pay out of more isn't as good. but at least thi way we protect the poor, and obama's the one who it'd seem would be willing to compromise allowing more privatizations etc.

he's for alterantive energy assistance. look up stiglitz as to how the government can be a method of ensuring the economy if facilitated when it lacks the resources in the private sector to do what it should be doing. the savings we'll see are tremendous. please look at my history of arguments for more on this issue.
mccain says things like "bush shouldn't sign laws he has disagreements on, and then fill out a signing statement that says what he disagreed with" we realisitically need compromise. you have to sign laws you don't agree with completely sometimes, and clarifying the points you don't like gives you a show that it wasn't completely you.

he wants to fix education. says no child left behind is an unfunded mandate. but, i fear, his ideas are just throwing money that the situation. he means well, and this is why soem vote. to me this isnt a reason but i thoughti'd mention it. hopefully he'd compromise the stupid things it appears he'd be doing.

he supports states rights in defiing gay marriage. it's an issue reasonable people can disagree on, i think, and so states rights which is how the issues of mariages has always bene done is optimal method of approaching that issue.

these are just the things i can think of off the top of my head. www.ontheissues.org for mroe if you haven't been htere.
Debate Round No. 1
zander

Con

All of the positions you listed are no brainers. What political candidate would campaign against balanced budgets or alternative fuels? Every single issue you listed are stock, copy and paste stands from nearly every politician running, ever. Fix education, what a novel idea! A democrat supporting roe v wade and gay marriage? Unheard of.

These positions are all well and good and if you are a democrat or agree with them, great. But, what makes Obama the best man for the job? What has he ever done that makes him a viable presidential candidate? No Obama supporter can point to one unique or significant thing on Obama's record. There was an Obama supporter on CNN about a week ago who was asked to name Obama's greatest accomplishment politically. He said editing the Harvard Law Review! There is one of those every year. Is every law school student deserving of leading the country?

The fact is Obama has no experience, no merit, and a silver tongue. He has done nothing of political substance that would even throw his hat into the presidential ring if he wasn't such a great orator. Hillary slaps him around in the debates when the press isn't lobbing Obama softballs. So, why Barack? How is he deserving or qualified to be president?
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

so you're no longer asking for positions of him, as you orgininally did. experience is important, but well defined posistions are better. not that his are well defined enough but, just pointing out that substance is better than experience. you should be focusing on that instead.

he graduated in international relations, which is vital today, then worked at a business organization regarding that topic.
he then became a community organizer for the disenfranchised.
he then became editor of harvard law review and graduated at the top of his class... which is more than just any law school's editor and class but harvard.
he then practiced civil rights law.
he taught constutional law at university of chicago, one of the most prestiguous school in the country.
he was a state legislator for many years.
he then became a US senator for a few years.

he seems pretty qualified to me. just because he's not be around as long doesn't mean he can't be president. voting for someone because they're old is not an argument. hte constituion allows president at 35, he's 46... if anyone were to be elected at his age, you couldn't get a better qualifed president. the only conclusion you could possibly come to is that you're going to vote based on number of years only... in which case mccain automatically wins.
he's got quality years, not quantity.
Debate Round No. 2
zander

Con

Ok, you just copy and pasted the same argument from our other debate.

Sure, we can look at substance too. So, Barack has none of either. You haven't pointed out any substance that Barack has. You just pointed out all of the typical positions that a democrat or any politician would have. What substance does Barack have that make him the best candidate for president?

Experience too. Where is Obama's? He has a run-of-the-mill senate record at both levels. His greatest achievement is his experience at Harvard. So, since harvard graduates students at the top of classes every year, we would have dozens of president worthy law students. His record is good, I don't deny that. But, is a successful law school experience followed by a mediocre record really grounds to give someone the country's reigns?

Age isn't the only argument. Its not just that he is young, he is unqualified and unfit. You want to give Obama a handicap because he is younger, but he needs to be examined on level ground. His record and merit simply doesn't match up. My position doesn't advocate age voting, quite the opposite.

There is flat out no reason Obama should be president. Good thing he talks pretty...
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i started the other thread, after i started debating you in this thread. you didn't have to go to that thread, but you chose to. if anyone is copy and pasting, it would be you since you're the one who engaged me the second time.

bill clinton most agree was qualified. people didn't diss him though for his age even though he was in fact three years younger than obama.

clinton was the attorney general for twelve years, and governor of arkansas for two years. he was a con law professor too at a less prestiguous law school for a year or two.

clinton got his hands dirty too practicing law with a short stint.

surely, out of all the things done, i'd agree that beng governor is best. but, people get in debates all the time about whether senator or governor is better.

obama was in either a state or federal legislature for twelve years, similar very much to clinton's.

in fact, the only real difference is that obama is older than clinton was, and practiced law and civl rights for mroe time.

the debate about experenice if you accept clinton comes down only to whether govenror or legislor is better. it's the same difference. reasonable people disagree.

something tells me you're only debating this, if you continue to debate this that is, because the media is telling you that you're suppose to.
Debate Round No. 3
zander

Con

Even if I give you that Bill was qualified, which is debatable, its not an age issue. Who cares that Clinton was three years younger, thats irrelevant. You have to look at qualifications.

Its more than legislator vs governor. Clinton had positive results running a state and Obama raises his hand. He hasn't instigated any significant legislation. The only thing he can say is that he gave a sweet speech against the war 7 years ago. Clinton had infinitely more political experience. How does Obama practicing civil rights law for a couple more years relate to presidential qualifications? Clinton was Attorney General. Obama was a law professor. Clinton raised up a state, Obama raises his hand.

So, even if I give you that Clinton was qualified, that in no way means Obama is. Personally, I don't think Bill was qualified. The only reason he won in 92 is because Bush I messed up so badly. Most importantly, Clinton has nothing to do with Obama's qualifications.

Notice you fail to mention anything Obama has done of substance. You just list the same law practice record that has no relevance to presidential qualification. Is this because Obama lacks substance and merit? It would appear so.

You don't dispute the fact that Obama is only being considered because of his rhetoric.

How am I the one getting played by the media? The media is SO FAR up Obama's rear its ridiculous. The debates are even becoming slanted his way, while all of the negatives get swept under the rug. Notice I'm the one backing my opinion with numerous solid arguments while you spoonfeed me the same old same old irrelevant biography.

He lacks substance and merit. This is obvious because you can't name anything he has done post-Harvard. Its ok though, he sounds pretty, and apparently thats what counts.
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Ironduke 8 years ago
Ironduke
Oh of course I am for the moving past of the past. I just think that the leader of one of the mightiest nations in the world should have an experienced man at the helm. But he is the best Democrat candidate, hands down. I just don't believe in his policies.
Posted by mindjob 8 years ago
mindjob
And what's wrong with that? He's willing to move past it, and so is the vast majority of the country. That's the only way you can get anything done. We've been over the past a lot, and now we have a candidate who acknowledges it, but wants to look to the future instead of living in the past. He sees that dwelling on the past only pisses both sides off and keeps anything of importance from being dealt with. Obama's lack of experience and the media's dealing with it has little to do with him being black. In fact, it has everything to do with his rhetoric and the belief that he can and will move us past the partisan bickering that has plagued politics. The media's handling of Obama is light because the majority of the country is in love with the idea of moving past partisan BS, and no media outlet wants to be viewed as impeding that, thus holding us back. To view anything else into it is trying to find more in there than there really is.
Posted by Ironduke 8 years ago
Ironduke
Mr. Obama is a bargainer. He lets white voters off the hook by not reminding them of their history of treatment of black people. White democrats will vote for him in turn to show that they accept his offer and to show they are not racist. By voting for a black man, they are trying to erase a history of predjudism. The man has had less than a term in the Senate and is running for president, or soon will be if he gets elected, which looks really good right now. If the man was white, everyone would call out not enough experiance, and be done with it, but, the bargaining comes in. The man is also a great orator, which always makes things sound good on speeches and debates.
Posted by mindjob 8 years ago
mindjob
Sigh. It's irritating reading debates where the person advocating my position is sucks. I wish I had seen this debate up during the challenge period.

According to Obama's site, he pushed through an earned income tax credit and early childhood education while in Illinois. He also passed a law requiring that all confessions and interrogations be videotaped after many of the people on death row were found to be innocent. He is an active member of the Veteran's Affairs committee, and as also been active in anti-proliferation work.

I am obviously an Obama supporter, and I know he has a lot less experience than most other politicians. That is actually one of the more appealing things about Obama for me. A president doesn't have to be a policy wonk or have tons of experience to be successful. The best thing a leader can do is surround himself with intelligent, able advisors and actually listen to them. Reagan was a governor before he was president, but he was much more aloof from policy than most other presidents. His advisors did most of the work. Obama is more intelligent than Reagan, and therefore would be a quick learner of anything he doesn't already know. An experienced vice president, such as Joe Biden or Bill Richardson, would also be a great addition for him. My main draw to Obama is his proven ability, in both Illinois and the Senate, of working with Republicans to get things done. He represents, and in fact is, a break with the partisanship that has plagued Washington.

As far as his policies now, I like the fact that his health care plan resembles Clintons, but that it lacks the mandate that Clinton's plan has. One of my majors in my undergrad was international relations, so I can tell you that I appreciate his willingness to meet with anyone, anywhere. I want someone who will act like a world leader instead of an elementary schooler giving the silent treatment to whoever they don't like. He doesn't have much experience, but it isnt everything
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by BellumQuodPacis 6 years ago
BellumQuodPacis
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:70 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 7 years ago
Tatarize
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:16 
Vote Placed by Mangani 7 years ago
Mangani
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:70 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 8 years ago
blond_guy
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
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 
Vote Placed by mynameisjonas 8 years ago
mynameisjonas
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
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 
Vote Placed by zander 8 years ago
zander
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Pride_of_Scotland 8 years ago
Pride_of_Scotland
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Hypnodoc 8 years ago
Hypnodoc
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
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 
Vote Placed by esmith1617 8 years ago
esmith1617
zanderdairygirl4u2cTied
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