The Instigator
Jason83632
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
LachlanSmithson
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Is Donald Trump a massive cunt??

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 1 vote the winner is...
LachlanSmithson
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/13/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 501 times Debate No: 89654
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

LachlanSmithson

Con

I accept.




BOP
Pro claims that Donald Trump is a massive c*nt. BOP is fully on Pro to prove their claim. As Con, I endeavour to counter Pros evidence and rebuttals whilst proving evidence to the contrary.




Definitions
a. Donald Trump: Donald John Trump is an American businessman, politician, television personality, author, and candidate for the Republican nomination for President of the United States in the 2016 election.
b. Massive: forming or consisting of a large mass, or impressively large or ponderous.
c. Cunt: the female genital organs; also : sexual intercourse with a woman

Sources
a. Wikipedia 2016 [Online], Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org..., Accessed at 14/4/16

b. Mirriam Webster 2016 [Online], Available at: http://www.merriam-webster.com..., Accessed at 14/4/16

c. Mirriam Webster 2016 [Online], Available at: http://www.merriam-webster.com..., Accessed at 14/4/16




REBUTTAL

Initial
Seeing as though Pro's argument consists of one word, 'knob', we are forced to make a few assumptions and observations.
1. This is more than likely a troll debate as no evidence has been properly conveyed by the opponent.
2. 'Knob' has no context. Why was it put there? Why is it important?
3. Pro is only providing a philosophical point of view, indicating potential incompetance.



I wish Pro the best of luck in the following debate!
Debate Round No. 1
Jason83632

Pro

Jason83632 forfeited this round.
LachlanSmithson

Con

Seeing as though Pro has forfeited is shall extend.



Extension

In both a grammatical and literal sense, it is impossible for Donald Trump to be a female"s genitals (or sexual intercourse with a woman). This is like saying, for example, the dog is a cat" No, it's not, don"t be an idiot.

The sentence structure is incorrect.

Whereas a normal person would have: Donald Trump is _____ (adjective), Pro has put a noun. Should "cunt" be replaced with any other another noun the sentence would still not make sense.

e.g. Donald Trump is a mouse. Donald Trump is a dinner plate. Donald Trump is a window etc etc.

Unless.. The noun is being used as an adjective, where in general, the sentence would be expanded on to include context (as shown below).

e.g. Donald Trump is a dog, because he eats his dinner off the ground and shits in the yard.

Or

Donald Trump is a man because he eats off the table and goes to the toilet like a civilised person. In which case he is (a man) and the claim makes sense.




I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 2
Jason83632

Pro

Jason83632 forfeited this round.
LachlanSmithson

Con

Extend




Pro has demonstrated by their inability to provide a decent debate that they are incompetent in the subject matter.

VOTE CON!

Congratulations to the winner, good luck Pro in the voting period!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by LachlanSmithson 1 year ago
LachlanSmithson
@Matt Hahaha I guessed this was a troll debate but I'm guessing I'll get conduct points ...
Posted by MattTheDreamer 1 year ago
MattTheDreamer
@Lachlan I feel like you're trying too hard for this debate but good luck to both sides anyway.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by ssadi 1 year ago
ssadi
Jason83632LachlanSmithsonTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct=> Pro forfeited 2 out of 3 rounds, so conduct to Con. Arguments: In the first round Pro didn't provide any definition etc. therefore it was done by Con instead. Pro did almost nothing, except of writing an irrelevant word with no explanation making it a complete forfeiture debate, and Con pointed this out, hence a convincing rebuttal. Furthermore, Con convincingly explained that according to definitions provided it is impossible for DT to be what resolution was about. So arguments to Con!