The Instigator
Bash1000
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Cmckee
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Bipartisan Politics

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/21/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 506 times Debate No: 56941
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Bash1000

Con

Bipartisan politics are not productive. Both parties are too afraid of losing the majority in the House or the Senate, not to mention the Oval Office. Opposing arguments would include text about minority ideas, but every idea is useless if the nothing gets done! I will end by saying that the parties are far too afraid of failure and don't think of the people enough. In other words, they are better off with the score 0 - 0 than the score 1 - 1.

I want to remind a competitor that there is a 1K character cap so make the response brief. Also beware of the 48 hr. time for response.
Cmckee

Pro

Firstly I accept this debate. However, a definition is needed.
"Bipartisanship is a political situation, usually in the context of a two-party system, in which opposing political parties find common ground through compromise"
Also, you need to clarify which side requires the burden of proof.

Anyway enough of the formalities, let us begin.

"Bipartisanship is to put aside matters of party for the good of the country "- Barack Obama in 2011. Using this inspiring quote as the basis of my first argument, I humbly ask, how can any patriotic American be against this. The good of the US should be any American's priority.

In my country(Northern Ireland) being patriotic is effectively killing innocent civilians in the name of independence. I personally would love a time when bipartisanship became a weapon of the patriots.
Debate Round No. 1
Bash1000

Con

You used a quote for the definition of bipartisanship from Wikipedia? Really?

"Bipartisanship is nice, but it cannot be a substitute for action" Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. This quote directly relates to my main argument. Bipartisanship is in the way of action. Each party is far too afraid to let the other do something that benefits the people. Low income American citizens are not thinking about their country. They're thinking about the bills that have been put into a "stalemate" by each party. They're thinking about the government's program for the poor which haven't had enough funding to reach their homes. They're thinking about when and where they will eat their next meal. In your definition of bipartisanship, you stated that two parties compromise. From what has not been completed, a more apt description would be "A government in which little gets done because two political parties struggle to compromise to produce bills that help the people of their country".
Cmckee

Pro

Cmckee forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Bash1000

Con

Bash1000 forfeited this round.
Cmckee

Pro

Cmckee forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.