The Instigator
brant.merrell
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Hanspete
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Marco Rubio makes a better 2016 presidential nominee than Paul Ryan

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/13/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 918 times Debate No: 58896
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

brant.merrell

Pro

Marco Rubio would do politically better than Paul Ryan against any democratic candidate in 2016, and would place the republican party in better shape over the long run.
Hanspete

Con

Paul Ryan would put the Republican Party in better shape, because he has a better appeal to liberals as well as conservatives that put him in a place to attract voters away from Hillary ( if she runs). Although Marco Rubio is a fine candidate Paul Ryan would simply do better.
Debate Round No. 1
brant.merrell

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

Despite similar voting records, Rubio's self-reflective rhetoric allows in his future a fact-responsive, technocratic shift that gives him an edge over the factual ignorance of Paul Ryan's blame game. Rubio has walked the line of Congressional compromise on immigration, which will become increasingly important to the republican party overtime. Rubio has never given a speech of deception like Paul Ryan's 2012 speech to the RNC [1], nor written a budget resolution that fails to do justice to the basics of conservative economics [2].

1. http://www.foxnews.com...

2.
http://www.forbes.com...
Hanspete

Con

With the deepest respect to Senator Rubio he is only slightly more well known than Ryan himself. I do greatly admire Rubio truly I do but Paul Ryan is less polarizing than Rubio especially in my state which is a swing state (Wisconsin).

This article highlights how even moderates don't do so well and shows how conservatives wouldn't do well ( I hate admitting this but I must face reality and any conservatives out their I'm open for argument on this topic). http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
This as well http://articles.chicagotribune.com....
Debate Round No. 2
brant.merrell

Pro

I would be hard-pressed to rank either as more 'moderate' than the other, but while Ryan adopts firm opinions (ie. $1 debt is a higher priority than $1 growth [2]) alongside their permanent popularity risks, and Romney adopts elastic opinions to cater to poll numbers (ie. abortion), Rubio has mastered the 'elastic popularity risk' to absorb the best of both worlds. The immigration controversy defined his ability to firmly resist pressure from the left, the right, and the poll numbers, and to bounce back later [3]. He knows how to raise money on the right without arming the left with sound bytes to rally its base. He coldly calculates his criticisms of opponents while relishing his every chance to praise them in between - a reverse strategy from that of less talented politicians. He is explicitly open to admitting he is wrong. Ultimately the entire republican party will have to adopt a similar strategy before it returns to its grand old glory.

3. http://t.co...
Hanspete

Con

It's not quite so hard pressing to to rank one more moderate over the other, but that is irrelevant. Rubio has mastered the elastic popularity risk, but he has not put that to the test on a race for the most powerful seat in the nation. Ryan, however has. Rubio does calculate his critics well, that's the makings of a good politician, but Ryan takes his head-on, which was demonstrated in the first weeks of the campaign. Of course Rubio has admitted he's been wrong, on a bit of a side note anyone who says they have never done anything wrong is a blatant liar. I agree that they Republican Party needs to adopt a strong platform, but they need Ryan's platform, to talk about things considered democrat grab issues as well as conservative grab issues.
Debate Round No. 3
brant.merrell

Pro

brant.merrell forfeited this round.
Hanspete

Con

Hanspete forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
brant.merrell

Pro

brant.merrell forfeited this round.
Hanspete

Con

Hanspete forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Hanspete 10 months ago
Hanspete
I honestly cannot believe that I at one point argued against Marco Rubio, jeez have I changed.
Posted by Hanspete 2 years ago
Hanspete
I hated having to use huffington post, it was the fastests source for me, which I ashamed of.
Posted by brant.merrell 2 years ago
brant.merrell
I referenced Fox, my conservative opponent referenced Huffington. This would never happen in a Facebook argument.
Posted by brant.merrell 2 years ago
brant.merrell
I legitimately believe the internet will eventually dilute the influence of corporate hacks, but in its current marketing-dependent form it is a net asset for them. The Citizen's United ruling and the rise of the super PAC also adds longevity to their grasp of Washington. And I feel that Congress is a lot more entrenched in corporate interests than the White House. Congressmen have to earn their publicity, so raising grassroots money doesn't come so naturally for their campaigns, and a few thousand dollars in billboards and newspaper ads can really tip a balance weight for a Congressman. Corporate lobbyists don't even need to find dishonest Congressmen to bribe when they can simply redefine reality for a trusting or dogmatic twenty or thirty percent of them. And the DNC's super delegate concept makes me a bit uneasy. I really liked its impact in 2008, but a well played hack still has an awful lot of cards to play.
Posted by JohnMaynardKeynes 2 years ago
JohnMaynardKeynes
You're right that they run Washington. But the notion that they will for at least 20 years? I'd like to say that makes you cynical...but the problem is, you're being pragmatic lol.
Posted by brant.merrell 2 years ago
brant.merrell
Is it cynical of me to believe corporate hacks run Washington and will continue to do so for at least twenty years?
Posted by Free_Th1nker 2 years ago
Free_Th1nker
Hillary certainly isn't the sure nomination for the Democratic Party. Anyone who's done their research knows she's a corporate hack with no foreign policy experience. She certainly did not deserve the job of Secretary of State and has performed miserably, most notably Benghazi. If Elizabeth Warren runs, I'm sure she'll give Hillary big competition.
Posted by JohnMaynardKeynes 2 years ago
JohnMaynardKeynes
How is it a good thing to solidify Hillary's win? lol. She's already polling extremely well. And I say that as someone who thinks she's a corporate hack.

And, YYW, what makes you say that Ryan would be a worse choice than Rubio? I don't think Ryan lost Romney the 2012 election; he probably helped, sure, but Romney had essentially zero chance from the start and there were a lot of reasons for that -- having to position himself to the right during the primary, the social conservative stances he had to take on, his penchant for lying, etc. I don't think, even if he chose Rubio or whomever, he would've had a chance.

Now, Ryan is a horrible candidate who literally takes his policy ideas from Atlas Shrugged. But at least Ryan has voted for debt limit increases. He's not so much a fanatical Teabagger as a "business Republican," -- which is still obviously bad for the country, but isn't exactly a departure from what we've already seen. The paradox that Paul Krugman pointed out around the time of the shutdown was that Wall Street may apply pressure; Rubio, while a corporate hack, is more into the institutionalized obstructionism.
Posted by brant.merrell 2 years ago
brant.merrell
And as a liberal, I am disturbed by your implication that we would ever benefit from a less competitive conservative candidate at the expense of the nation's aggregate leadership.
Posted by brant.merrell 2 years ago
brant.merrell
Well played, but I'd demonstrate that Hillary would defeat either of them, and move on to establish that the GOP's 2016 nominee matters only because he will influence the Republican Platform in 2020 and 2024; I would then argue that the future sophistication of the democratic party will depend on the future sophistication of its competition, thus freeing myself of your attempt to reverse a hierarchical comparison of Ryan and Rubio.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
brant.merrellHanspeteTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: we really aren't sure who came out in the end. Arguments went back and forth.