The Instigator
ClashnBoom
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Sarra
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Obama should run again.

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...
Sarra
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/11/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 786 times Debate No: 79629
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

ClashnBoom

Pro

He was a good president, I think he should run again.

Rules:
You can like argue in the first round but nit the last.
You cannot challenge my definitions. lol.
Sarra

Con

I accept.

I believe President Obama has been a good President, but he should not run again.
Debate Round No. 1
ClashnBoom

Pro

It's healthy.
Sarra

Con

Pro has three potential avenues of arguing that Obama should not run again. I am unsure which of the three Pro is referring to when s/he writes "It's healthy." Pro has BOP. Two of the three potential avenues are unhealthy and the third is irrelevant to health. Without Pro being more specific, I am unsure how to more articulately counter Pro's claim.
Debate Round No. 2
ClashnBoom

Pro

Definitions.

Running. The act of exercising.

Exercising is healthy http://www.google.com... So Obama should run again
Sarra

Con

I accept Pro"s definition.

A lot of people in America really, really hate President Obama. Hate groups have risen by over 700% since President Obama took office. "According to the SPLC, the number of radical "anti-government" militia groups increased from 150 to 1,274 during the years of the Obama presidency. There have been more homegrown domestic terrorism attacks by right-wing groups than by international terrorists during his presidency as well, Potok noted." [5]. Despite President Obama being born in Hawaii two years after it became a state and despite President Obama attending a Christian church with his mother since he was a baby, these radicals believe President Obama is not American and a secret Muslim. These radicals want to get rid of him [6]. I, personally, do not want to see our siting President to get injured by radicals that live among us, nor would him being injured by radicals be in his best interest. For this reason, President Obama should not run again for his own well being.

Sources:
[1] http://abcnews.go.com...
[2] http://www.infinitelooper.com...
Debate Round No. 3
ClashnBoom

Pro

ClashnBoom forfeited this round.
Sarra

Con

Pro forfeited.
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by birdlandmemories 2 years ago
birdlandmemories
What does "It's healthy" mean?
Posted by ClashnBoom 2 years ago
ClashnBoom
Or I can just troll.....
Posted by ClashnBoom 2 years ago
ClashnBoom
I'll try.
Posted by Sarra 2 years ago
Sarra
Can you post all the definitions you want to use for this debate in round 2?
Posted by ClashnBoom 2 years ago
ClashnBoom
Lol. I had to sound dumb in the first round. I will define nit as nit in the next round.
Posted by Sarra 2 years ago
Sarra
You failed to define the word "can". I have to go to work in a little over an hour...
Posted by ClashnBoom 2 years ago
ClashnBoom
Btw Con you were supposed to post arguments in R1
Posted by ClashnBoom 2 years ago
ClashnBoom
1. He let me try to noob trap someone 2. That's it.
Posted by MakeSensePeopleDont 2 years ago
MakeSensePeopleDont
Really? You think Obama is a good president? Give me examples of what he has done that makes him a good president. I would LOVE to hear this list.
Posted by ClashnBoom 2 years ago
ClashnBoom
I knew I should've put an elo restriction. Lol. Here goes nothing.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
ClashnBoomSarraTied
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: (1) Conduct. Con wins conduct, as Pro forfeited a round. (2) Arguments. All Pro argued is that "running is healthy." First, I don't see a link between "running is healthy" and "Obama should run." The link that say "if X is healthy, X should be done" is missing, and is an unjustified assumption. Pro doesn't substantiate this. Con presents much stronger offense, arguing that it is unsafe for Obama to run randomly. She demonstrates that (a) it's unsafe for the president to run, and (b) what is unsafe should not be done (the B point could have been substantiated, but it was there). Both sides drop the others' arguments, and I'm not really given a weighing mechanism. But I vote Pro down on accounts of Con having an additional, crucial link. I can also see that a threat to life outweighs good health. While neither side focuses on a clear impact analysis (i.e. one that involves magnitude as well as probability), I can vote Con because of my own impact analysis, and Con's link. I vote Con.