The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against) should sponsor a Presidential Debate with the candidates on various issues.

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Udel has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/15/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 426 times Debate No: 93755
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




As part of the race for President of the United States, major candidates should be forced to participate in a on a series of issues. This would allow the public to see how the candidates express themselves through written communication, how they reason and what opinions they take. If it were opened up to the public as a whole for comments, it might do a great deal of good to inform the electorate.

(Please comment if you agree and want to actually make this happen)


First off, Pro says the candidates should be "forced" to debate on this site which is not something positive. Force should not be required. If the candidates see a benefit to a social presence on this site, that is fine, but it should not be forced.

The benefits of having candidates post on this site are two-fold: we get to see their positions on the issues and we get to see them compare their platforms, and defend their platforms against their opponents. But the candidate's websites and other sites comparing them already tell us where they stand on the issues and how the candidates differ from each other.

The candidates participate in multiple debates throughout the campaign, so we already get to see them debate live in real time and in person. On this website, candidates would probably have one of their staff members post their talking points. Real live debates are more personal.

We would not get to see the candidate's "written communication" showed off here, and plus politicians do not really do a lot of written work while in office so it's irrelevant.

People campaigning have better and more important things to do with their time. If there are already places people can see them explain their views (like interviews, rallies, appearances) then having the candidates on this site doesn't give us anything new or useful.
Debate Round No. 1


The proposition never said that the candidates should be forced to participate, it merely says that should sponsor the debate.

Of course candidates could have a staff write entirely or contribute to the exercise, that would say a lot about their decision making in staff selection, but the candidates would still be responsible for the message.

The debates are all optional. No candidate has to participate in them, it is just a societal expectation. In addition, many of the debates are framed on current political faux pas and don't necessarily get into the details of the issues. If you look at Trump's website, there are hardly any actual specific plans or rationales, just the assertion that whatever he is going to do will "make America great" without offering any real reason why or how this will be done.

The forum is centered upon rational arguments along with statistical and cited examples that help boost an argument dependent upon their validity.

Wouldn't it serve the public to see how a candidate reasons and logically constructs their beliefs?

You say that the President of the United States does not write very often. This is completely untrue. There are hundreds of communications that are sent to heads of state, ambassadors and politicos as well as ordinary citizens every year.

In addition to seeing the candidate's perspective on an issue, it would be a great exercise to force, yes, force a candidate to argue the counter-point of something that they disagree with. It would show if they truly understand the best arguments of the other side. This is what makes a person of reason and intellect a mature decision maker, if they can, in fact, truly understand and argue in favor of their opponent's perspective.

I don't know what the down side would be to seeing our Presidential Candidates participate in a written and formalized debate. I'm fairly certain it would be very revealing for the public and demonstrate clearly points in which logic has given way to political expediency.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by rezleader 2 years ago
Who cares if they don't have the guts to do it themselves? It would be very illuminating either way.
Posted by BJC 2 years ago
Unfortunately they would probably have an intern write it based off talking points
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.