The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

Donald Trump is Faking a Run for Presidency in 2012

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
Pro Tied Con
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/24/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,123 times Debate No: 16113
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)




This is my first debate on this site so please bear with me if I don't use proper form or abide by rules I haven't read yet. I encourage corrects so that I can improve my activities here.

This is not Trumps first time to speculate at a run for the White House. He did this in 2000, 2004, and 2008 as well.

I chose "Pro" since I personally believe that based on his previous activities and positions he has no honest intention of running this time.


I accept my opponent's challenge and look forward to a good debate. I would like to provide the following definitions and clarifications:

"faking" is defined as "to alter, manipulate, or treat so as to give a spuriously genuine appearance to" [1]

As my opponent is the Instigator, she has the burden of proof to show that Donald Trump is faking a run for presidency. I await my opponent's arguments in the next round.

Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank my opponent for joining me in this debate. I realize this is a very speculative topic and that ultimately one of us will be proven right/wrong in time, but right now we will base our opinions on information available to us.

As instigator, I have no problem with being expected to carry my BoP in order to convince readers/voters that my opinion very well could be accurate, but I would encourage my opponent to provide information of his own to show why he feels that this time Donald Trump is serious about his intent. I don't consider it any type of requirement, however it would make that argument more compelling for readers/voters.

I have no problem with the definition of "faking" as "faking" is defined as "to alter, manipulate, or treat so as to give a spuriously genuine appearance to", primarily being the portion that reads, "treat so as to give a spuriously genuine appearance of."

This is not the first time Donald Trump has made a grand show of considering a run for the White House. In 2000 he was reported to have told a reporter at the Associated Press that only death would keep him from running. Yet, with no fanfare, he decided against it.

Trump was reported to be running on the Reform Party ticket that year; the same year, coincidentally, as the release of his book, "The America We Deserve" where he says that if he were president he would pass a law that would put a 14.25% tax on individuals and trusts with a net worth over $10 million, pass tougher laws on hate crimes (using the murder of Matthew Shepard as an example), and he would pass universal health care. All agendas that the Republican Party is against.

2004-2005 was a very big year for Mr. Trump. During that year his Trump Hotels had to undergo restructuring of debt, and the company ended up filing for bankruptcy coming out of the mess as a whole new company. Luckily, that year he had four new books to help off-set his expenses:

Trump: How to Get Rich (2004)
The Way to the Top: The Best Business Advice I Ever Received (2004)
Trump: Think Like a Billionaire: Everything You Need to Know About Success, Real Estate, and Life (2004)
Trump: The Best Golf Advice I Ever Received (2005)

Rumors of a gubernatorial run didn't hurt his book sales.

When Donald Trump first made his utterance that he wasn't sure that President Obama was born in the US, the ratings on his show, "Celebrity Apprentice" went up. The more he publicly doubted the authenticity of the President's birth certificate, the higher his ratings went.

There is also a new book out this year by Trump, "Trump Towers", and publicity generally means higher sales.

Lastly, I would like to point to Donald Trump's "investigation" into President Obama's birth certificate. He took his so-called investigation so far as to say that the President's birth certificate was actually missing just hours before the President himself presented the long form to the public. Then he immediately takes credit for bringing the truth to light.

Given this history, these actions, I predict his season finale announcement will consist of some monumental excuse for refraining from running for president yet again this election year. His bids are done in order to increasing show ratings and book sales, nothing more.


My opponent begins by saying that this is not Donald Trump's first time considering running for presidency, by giving the example of his attempted run in 2000 as a member of the Reform Party, trying to show that by speculating to run for presidency one time and choosing not to, he will not run again. Mr. Trump is, as I will point out later in the round, taking the 2012 election much more seriously than he took the 2000 election, and he is doing quite a bit better in terms of his popularity in the election.

Next, my opponent discusses Mr. Trump's company filing for bankruptcy and the books he published. She mentions his consideration of running for New York governor in 2006, claiming that it was used as a way to increase his book sales. She talks about his questioning of President Obama raising his ratings on "Celebrity Apprentice". She brings up his new book, claiming that "publicity generally means higher sales". My opponent is touching on a natural side-effect of running for presidency for anyone- an increase in publicity. However, we have no reason to believe that, in the 2012 election, publicity is Mr. Trump's main motive for running. The fact that he has considered running for presidency multiple times over the past 11 years shows that he is, indeed, seriously considering it now.

My opponent concludes by mentioning Mr. Trump taking credit for the investigation into President Obama's birth certificate, giving no reason as to why this should be a potential reason to say that Mr. Trump is faking a run. This argument is entirely irrelevant.

I would now like to point out some evidence that shows that Mr. Trump is indeed going to be running for presidency:

Firstly, Mr. Trump is taking the 2012 presidency much more seriously than he has previous. He attended the Conservative Political Action Conference[1], and will be attending a New Hampshire Institute of Politics forum in June[2]. The fact that he is attending this conventions as a member of the Republican party shows that he is much more serious about running for presidency in the 2012 election than in 2000.

Secondly, Mr. Trump, now as a member of the Republican party, is currently leading the GOP poll for the Republican primary conducted by the Public Policy Polling organization. He currently is leading with 26% of all votes, ahead of Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, and Sarah Palin[3]. As he is currently leading as the Republican primary, it would be logical for Mr. Trump to continue in his campaign for presidency. If my opponent is correct in her thoughts that Mr. Trump is only speculating a run to increase popularity, then Mr. Trump will logically run for president as the Republican primary, which would generate even more popularity. Remember that the debate here is not whether or not Mr. Trump's motives for running are popularity or presidency, but whether or not Mr. Trump is not going to genuinely be running. And given this information, regardless of his motives, it appears that Mr. Trump is genuinely going to be running for president in 2012.

Debate Round No. 2


I would like to open by thanking my opponent for pushing me back on track, I have a tendency to "drift"on topics. Thank you for not drifting with me, but rather anchoring me to the topic I proposed. Your focus is truly appreciated.

One incident this week has contributed to my doubts of Mr. Trump's seriousness in running. He had declared that he had hired a team of investigators to send to Hawaii to look into the President's birth certificate. Monday he told Anderson Cooper that his investigators found that the President's birth certificate was missing, yet the following day the President provided a copy of the long form.

It is inconceivable that if Trump were serious about any of this that he would spend good money on investigators that were that incompetent.

Having said that, I have to confess that my certitude has waned after watching the correspondence dinner last night. His utter lack of amusement at the jabs made at his conspiracy hunting could indicate that he was taking all of his actions, no matter how weak, seriously. I have to concede, he may very well be serious.


My opponent mentions Trump's team of investigators who investigated into President Obama's birth certificate being incompetent. Though this may suggest Trump's potential lack of seriousness in the matter, we have no proof that Trump knew the investigators were incompetent, mistakes could have been made.

Then, my opponent concludes by conceding that Donald Trump is most likely going to be seriously running for President in 2012, and therefore, I ask that you please vote Con.

I thank my opponent for what has been a very interesting debate.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by JustaWriter 5 years ago
Cliff, thanks for point, that was very kind of you.

And to further drive home my loss, I heard on the news today that he does indeed plan to run, but he can't make an official announcement until his show ends. I suppose he could still find a way to back out if he wanted to, but I think he really intends to time.

Brian, thanks for the debate. I know it was an extremely speculative topic, but I started it hastily. Hopefully I'll come up with something better next time. =D
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 5 years ago
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 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: Pro conceded
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: BoP was on Pro who presented scant evidence, much of it was not really relevant. Con had a decent refute and presented opposing evidence, and then Pro conceded. Could not be a more clear win on arguments, but 1 pt to Pro for a decent effort.