The Instigator
Lookingatissues
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Tough
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Is Hillary and the democrat party really for woman's rights

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 2 votes the winner is...
Tough
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/30/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 460 times Debate No: 79183
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

Lookingatissues

Pro

Hillary Clinton just recently suggested that the republicans didn't back women's rights as the democrats do when she stood in front of a mike while campaigning and she bad- mouthed Donald trump and the republican party for not identifying with women in their struggles. If Hillary and the democrat party were the defenders of women and women's rights as they claim to be would they be selective in backing women or would they get behind all women trying to advance in a world that has been so unfairly against them, in feminists opinion.
A recent article posted on the internet reveals that maybe the democrats aren't really the defenders of women's rights as they claim themselves to be.
The recent Internet article was referring to the republican woman,"Carly Fiorina," running for the presidency and the up coming debates being held on CNN.
The Internet article referred to CNN as," (Clinton News Network)" ...which stated,"and many in the political class want to keep Carly off the debate stage...." The Media and the elite intelligentsia in Education have long been recognized as a arm of the democrat party so its not surprising that CNN was labeled as," Clinton News Network..." /Democrat party Mouth piece.After Hillary and the democrat party not defending this woman's chances to advance herself in the world can Hillary and the democrats still tout that they are for all for women's rights I claim that Hillary and the democrat party is only interested in defending women's rights when the woman is a democrat, other wise, she is on her own and the Hillary and the democrat party say, Have at her, we don't know her. Well so much for the defenders of women's rights.
Tough

Con

Pro is debating against the resolution so I automatically win.
Debate Round No. 1
Lookingatissues

Pro

Lookingatissues
Pro (for)
When looking up the word ...FOR ) in the Thesaurus in the OxFord American Writer's Thesaurus under (favor,) I find as a definition for the word,... "For" is " Favor." " she looked at him with "favor," The word,"Pro," in the dictionary means," favoring, supporting...."
The word,"CON," means..... " against." indicating that you don't agree with what I posted on Debate.org about Hillary and the democrat party, not truly being the defenders of feminists and women's rights, as they have claimed so often to be.
Con responded,"Tough....."Pro is debating against the resolution so I automatically win."
CON.....Your statement isn't true,... I am in "favor," with what I posted, that, as I posted, Hillary and the democrat party aren't the defenders of women's rights and feminists as they profess to be.
Tough

Con

The resolution says they really do support them. I am yet to see a reason to counter you.
Debate Round No. 2
Lookingatissues

Pro

I posted this in my first post,"If Hillary and the democrat party were the defenders of women and women's rights as they claim to be ( would they be selective in backing women or would they get behind all women) trying to advance in a world that has been so unfairly against them, in feminists opinion....." I believe that this statement would establish that I don't find evidence that Hillary and the democrat party can claim that either Hillary or the democrat party is for advancing all females, just those who follow the leftist democrat party line that tells women that they are victims and need government to come to their rescue if they're going to succeed.
Women have joined other groups recognized as victims who demand government grant them preferences.
Tough

Con

Yeah, you're still arguing for Con.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Tough 2 years ago
Tough
How very fascinating, my jaw dropped in shock.
Posted by Lookingatissues 2 years ago
Lookingatissues
Part Number 2 by Lookingattheissues subject of debate "Is Hillary and the democrat party really for woman's rights"
Then I gave as an example that Hillary and the democrat party are not for all women's right to advance themselves by posting this, ".....A recent article posted on the internet reveals that maybe (the democrats aren't really the defenders of women's rights as they claim themselves to be.) "but are selective.....The recent Internet article was referring to the republican woman,"Carly Fiorina," running for the presidency..... Does this suggest that I believe that Hillary and the democrat party, are the strong defenders of women that they claim to be, are supportive of all women's rights, what about this woman,"Carly Fiorina?"
My position, as demonstrated by what I posted, is that Hillary and the democrat party are not for all women to advance themselves, but are just using the subterfuge of being the defenders of women's rights to advance their own agendas.
Posted by Lookingatissues 2 years ago
Lookingatissues
Con..."Yeah, you're still arguing for Con."
The Question that was asked was,"Is Hillary and the democrat party really for woman's rights."
Con..."Yeah, you're still arguing for Con."
The Question that was asked was,"Is Hillary and the democrat party really for woman's rights."
If what you claim were to be true my post would have stated that Hillary and the democrat party were , and always had been, defenders of women's rights. Since my posts demonstrated that Hillary and the democrat weren't really defenders of women's rights as they claim, My posted debate affirms that Hillary and the democrat party are not the defenders of women's right as they like to claim they are.
My argument is and always has been that "Hillary and the democrat party aren't defenders of women's rights.
Even the question asked by the title of the debate suggests that I have doubts about the validity of Hillary and the democrat party being defenders of women's rights then I confirm my position by posting," If Hillary and the democrat party were the defenders of women and women's rights as they claim to be, would they be selective in backing women or would they get behind all women trying to advance in a world that has been so unfairly against them, in feminists opinion...." Part Number !..
Part Number 2 to follow in comment box below by Lookingatthe issues
Posted by Lookingatissues 2 years ago
Lookingatissues
Reply to Sara by Lookingattheissue
Sara replied,"It is not news, but rather a reply to another person's post... It matters little where the information quoted came from, the important issue , was what was posted, accurate.
Posted by Sarra 2 years ago
Sarra
I finally found the site Pro mentioned in their post.
http://teapartyorganizers.ning.com...

It is not news, but rather a reply to another person's post. ctrl + f "CARLY for America" to find the reply.

This is not a news site. This is a right wing propaganda site. (Both the right and the left have propaganda sites.)
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
LookingatissuesToughTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued the Con position. The Con position was the only arguments offered, so the Con position wins.
Vote Placed by Sarra 2 years ago
Sarra
LookingatissuesToughTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe Lookingatissues meant to take the Con side as LAI argued Con for the entire debate.