The Instigator
Youraverageunicorn
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Mharman
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Is Trump Racist?

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 4 votes the winner is...
Mharman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/24/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,111 times Debate No: 103653
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (28)
Votes (4)

 

Youraverageunicorn

Pro

The rounds are:
1. Acceptance
2. Argument
3. Rebuttal
you will start round 1 by just saying "I accept"
Mharman

Con

Challenge Accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
Youraverageunicorn

Pro

Trump is a racist. He just is. And if sadly that isn't enough, well then here you go:

This is how Trump is racist towards colored people.
He doesn't support the Black lives Matter movement.
For some reason he says he has a great relationship with the black people. Do you honestly think a normal person would say that? By the way let me stop right here for a second. I don't need to back this up with any proof. If you truly don't believe me, look it up yourself and then if you don't find anything, you can attack me. Good Luck!
He wouldn't rent his company to black people. Trump was sued twice for that.
By the way, he has a racist past. He said that he doesn't feel comfortable letting black people handle his money.

Again, if you pay attention to the news you can understand immediately how he fees about hispanics and muslims and anyone else who isn't white.
He thought a judge was being biased because he was mexican.
He attacks muslims like the travel ban he had and he attacked muslim Gold Star parents.
Plus, don't go all out on me by saying that he loves blacks or whatever because just wait:

No matter what you say, even in some alternate universe where he wasn't racist, there's proof that hate crimes have increased since the beginning of Trump's presidency. PROOF PEOPLE
He said there was blame for both sides on the Charlottesville incident. YEAH RIGHT ON A NEO NATZI PROTEST?!
He denies responsibility on racist crimes that followed his election.
He doesn't pay close attention because when he was saying racism is "evil" he failed to notice that people were holding white supremacy flags and KKK flags which brings me to another thing.
He went to a white supremacy rally and failed to address racist comments made which if you ask me means he agreed with them. If someone was truly not racist, they would never do anything to harm anyone and would do things to help them. Don't go all out on me saying he's not racist because like I said before, if you were to say he's not, he's obviously okay with the hate crimes going on. There are statistics proving hate crimes have increased and it's all because of Trump just going along with it. He hasn't really addressed those problems. He isn't a busy man! He just doesn't care. If he cared he'd do something about it!
Mharman

Con

Trump has a plan to help the black communtiy, effectively proving that he is not racist.
donald-trump-black-communities

Also, keep in mind that the comments he made at his first rally were directed at illegal immigrants, not all hispanics.

This is pretty much all I have to say here. This debate is more of a "show me the claims of him being racist and I will rebut them." In order to prove that he is not racist, I must look at the claims being made by my opponent. However, since my opponent has stated that Round 2 is all aguments and no rebuttals, I can not rebut her claims until the Third Round. I have already drafed my rebuttals for that, and am looking forward to posting it. That is all.
Debate Round No. 2
Youraverageunicorn

Pro

Are you kidding me?
Do you think I would make up everything I just said?????

The only thing you addressed was he made a plan to help the black community and you said nothing else! Either you don't know anything about debate or that's all you can give. I personally have no reason to believe that because my evidence was detailed and believable and you can look up while you give one stupid example that has no details whatsoever and you expect me to believe that? you're going to need a lot more than that. I can't wait to see what you have planned for the rebuttal because since you provided nothing in any way for the round two, I should automatically win for that.

this is all I have to say because you gave me nothing else to respond to.
Mharman

Con

My opponent, while complaining about the little points I gave, also didn't even rebut those points. Yes, that was all I had to give, and I explained why. Ironically, she also says I don't know how to debate, yet she thinks she should get an automatic win (I did post something; you just ignored it). In addition, my 'one stupid example' did have details; i.e. a source that I put in the comments section, since the link failed the first time. Here is my rebuttal of her argument.



"He doesn't support the Black lives Matter movement."
That doesn't make him racist. Just because he doesn't support the movement doesn't mean he disagrees with the statement that "Black Lives Matter". His problem with the movement is the same as most people's- myself included- that is, how BLM conveys their statement. Since it's beginning in 2013, BLM has been cited for their acts of violence [1,2,3,4,5], property damage[6,7,8,9], and obstruction of transportation [10,11,12,13,14,15,16].

"For some reason he says he has a great relationship with the black people. Do you honestly think a normal person would say that? By the way let me stop right here for a second. I don't need to back this up with any proof. If you truly don't believe me, look it up yourself and then if you don't find anything, you can attack me. Good Luck!"
Whether or not the majority thinks he's crazy is not the question. This is a logical fallacy [17] here. And yes, you do need to prove this. This is a debate, you must back your claims up.

"He wouldn't rent his company to black people. Trump was sued twice for that."
Wrong. He wouldn't rent his company because because of their income. This was so that he could make sure the people who rented could actually pay for what they rented.

"By the way, he has a racist past. He said that he doesn't feel comfortable letting black people handle his money."
I would like to say that when he said he doesn't feel comfortable with blacks handling money, he was joking. The first part of that was joke was just the setup to make the punchline of "I only want Jews handling my money." He was a making a Jewish joke here, keep in mind that a joke doesn't necessarily reflect on a person's actual beliefs. None of this here makes his past to be racist.

"Again, if you pay attention to the news you can understand immediately how he fees about hispanics and muslims and anyone else who isn't white."
You mean the media that is biased against Trump? Just because the media says it, doesn't make it true.

"He thought a judge was being biased because he was mexican."
No, because he is a LIBERAL hispanic. Considering we have seen many liberal minorities showing bias in favor of their own, his claim here is well warranted. For example, affirmative action; which gives minorities extra SAT and ACT points, and also gives them more job opportunities than whites and Asians [18].

"He attacks muslims like the travel ban he had and he attacked muslim Gold Star parents."
The travel is not targeted as Muslims, but rather EXTREMIST Muslims [19]. The ban is also temporary, keep in mind that once extra security is installed, the good Islamic people can come in, while the extremists are filtered out.

As for his comments on the Gold Star mom, his concerns are well warranted. In his quote, he questioned whether the mom there was even allowed to speak or not. This is because in most predominantly Muslin countries, women have severe restrictions on their rights [20, 21].

"No matter what you say, even in some alternate universe where he wasn't racist, there's proof that hate crimes have increased since the beginning of Trump's presidency."
By whom? First off, allow me to point out many of these hate crimes were committed by liberals seeking to frame Trump supporters [22, 23]. Second let me also point out the logical fallacy here. This one is called the association fallacy [24]. Basically, just because there are bad people who support Trump, doesn't mean that he himself is bad. For example the Communist Party endorsed Obama in 2012 [25, 26]. That doesn't make Obama communist. Even worse, is the double standard applied here [27]. When the American Nazi Party endorsed Trump, the left media went crazy. When the American Communist Party endorsed Hillary Clinton, the left media didn't even bat an eye. It is also crucial to keep in mind that if you want white supremacy, and Trump wants equality and Clinton wants minority supremacy, you are going to pick Trump.

"He said there was blame for both sides on the Charlottesville incident. YEAH RIGHT ON A NEO NATZI PROTEST?!"
That was not a neo-Nazi protest. There were only a few actual Nazis there, but the left media labeled them all as Nazis [28]. Unite the Right started as a peaceful protest (they had even planned this along with the city). When ANTIFA and BLM showed up illegally, the started causing chaos [29]. Then, UTR responded by retaliating. Eventually, the protest had become a clash. So yes, both sides are to blame here.

"He denies responsibility on racist crimes that followed his election. He doesn't pay close attention because when he was saying racism is "evil" he failed to notice that people were holding white supremacy flags and KKK flags which brings me to another thing."
This doesn't make him racist. If anything, it shows that he wishes not to be associated with the racist acts that were being done in his name. Not only is this is a self-defeating argument, it is also another example of the association fallacy.

"He went to a white supremacy rally and failed to address racist comments made which if you ask me means he agreed with them."
Once again, there only a few actual white supremacists there. This was another skewed labeling by the left media.

"If someone was truly not racist, they would never do anything to harm anyone and would do things to help them."
Trump plans on doing things to help. One of his main arguments of why black people should support him is that he will fix the inner city by addressing the black-on-black crime.

"Don't go all out on me saying he's not racist because like I said before, if you were to say he's not, he's obviously okay with the hate crimes going on."
Here we go with the association fallacy again. I have already proven that he is not okay with the hate crimes.

"There are statistics proving hate crimes have increased and it's all because of Trump just going along with it. He hasn't really addressed those problems."
Woah, woah, woah there! I have already proved that the hate crime are not his fault, and that your committing the association fallacy, but this is a huge leap you're taking here. Trump HAS addressed those problems, you even said it yourself earlier without realizing it. When you criticized him for blaming both sides, you also admitted that he HAS addressed the situation. You also admitted that he HAS addressed it when you criticized him for denying the responsiblilty for those hate crimes.

"He isn't a busy man! He just doesn't care. If he cared he'd do something about it!"
He is busy. Keep in mid that every week he comes out with something new. And remember the first month? That was crazy; I couldn't even keep up with all the news! Second, he does care, and he will do something about if he hasn't already. Remember: He said he had a plan to fix the inner cities [30].

SOURCES
They are in the comments section due to the fact that I am running out of space.

Debate Round No. 3
28 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Forever23// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Yes

[*Reason for removal*] The voting period on this debate ended before this vote was cast. Votes placed after the end of the voting period are against site rules, regardless of what errors on the site allow.
************************************************************************
Posted by Mharman 7 months ago
Mharman
They riot and destroy property in the streets. That's not a stupid reason to dislike them.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 7 months ago
Youraverageunicorn
his reason for it is stupid and this debate is done.
Posted by Bitch_Goddess 7 months ago
Bitch_Goddess
"This is how Trump is racist towards colored people.
He doesn't support the Black Lives Matter movement."
I would have to disagree with that statement completely. While I do believe Trump is a racist, it doesn't make you racist if you don't support BLM.
That comment, in and of itself, is very ignorant.
Posted by Mharman 7 months ago
Mharman
Thank God. You aren't worth my time.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 7 months ago
Youraverageunicorn
well then why did you mention how "feminine" my profile was? you know what? just forget it. you aren't worth my time.
Posted by Mharman 7 months ago
Mharman
This is a debate site. People debate things.

And no, I did not contradict myself. I said THEY didn't pay attention. I never said I didn't.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 7 months ago
Youraverageunicorn
plus, you just contradicted yourself. you said that no one pays attention to the profile pic and username but you obviously looked at my entire account to prove a point and to be a little stereotypical.
Posted by Youraverageunicorn 7 months ago
Youraverageunicorn
well then why do you bother to interfere??? I do this because I like a little argument. you're taking everything so literally.
Posted by Mharman 7 months ago
Mharman
They assume he because A. They're not paying attention to your profile pic and username, and B. because people typically refer to someone a 'he' when they don't actually know the gender.

Allow me to also point out that most people don't list their gender for internet security reasons; they don't want to reveal too much about themselves.

And finally, I'm not going all out on you..
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by passwordstipulationssuck 7 months ago
passwordstipulationssuck
YouraverageunicornMharmanTied
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: con provided well thought out arguments that effectively dismantled pros points. I would have given sources to con but it was in the comments section and I don't want to get my vote removed again.
Vote Placed by DNehlsen 7 months ago
DNehlsen
YouraverageunicornMharmanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm going to give conduct to Pro, as posting his sources in the comments section gave him an unfair advantage in word count. It also would've been preferable if Con had made his rebuttals in the second round so that Pro could respond accordingly. Despite this, Con still presented many more accurate sources for his arguments. Pro never provided any source work for her claims, so there was not much for me to go off of. Overall, I feel that Pro did an excellent job articulating his points. I would encourage Pro to provide more sourcing and novel information in her presentations. I would encourage Con to ensure he includes all of his points and source-work in his debate.
Vote Placed by BennyW 7 months ago
BennyW
YouraverageunicornMharmanTied
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 didn't prove much in the way of arguments he asserted the Trump was racist but then didn't provide any real proof, rather exerting con and the audience to "look it up". COn provided actual arguments and backed them up with sources (albeit in the comments section).
Vote Placed by Defro 7 months ago
Defro
YouraverageunicornMharmanTied
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: No conduct violations. Spelling and grammar were acceptable on both sides. No points awarded for sources because there were no sources. Con posted sources in the comments, but anything outside the parameters of the debate are invalid. Pro's round 1 arguments were shallow, and were not credible. The only argument he had that had potential was that statistics show a rise in hate crime since Trump's election. However he didn't cite sources, and didn't establish the connection that a rise in hate crime means Trump is racist. The reason why Con won in my eyes was because he addressed almost all of Pro's arguments in the last round. Pro did not meet the burden of proof.