The Instigator
David12N
Pro (for)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

People should want to and vote in US elections

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 6 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/17/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 763 times Debate No: 73698
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (6)

 

David12N

Pro

I am arguing that Americans should not be against voting in US elections because voting does matter and people should be involved in the political process more.
Wylted

Con

Women shouldn't vote, or even have the right to vote. They disproportionately vote for democrats, and democrats are trying to destroy America.

Also, women thinking about politics and voting, would have less time making their husband dinner and taking care of the kids. If I saw my Fiance vote, I would smack her in the face and tell her to make me a sandwich.
Debate Round No. 1
David12N

Pro

You would have to prove that democrats are trying to destroy America in order for that argument to be more valid. Not all women vote for democrats and so that would not be a reason to ban all women from voting.

I know you libertarians are not big fans of laws but smacking someone in the face is illegal.

If you have some real arguments to put forward I would like to hear them.
Wylted

Con

Wylted forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
David12N

Pro

Thanks for the debate.
Wylted

Con

This is simple. I urge the voters to look at my premises. I said women should not vote, because women would have less time to cook and take care of the kids. This premise/s was/were never challenged, while my opponent failed to provide a single premise. Obvious vote for con, even with the forfeited round.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
My opinion is that BOP doesn't matter here. I made an argument, my opponent didn't. I should win.
Posted by Varrack 2 years ago
Varrack
Why does Pro have the BOP? The resolution is normative in nature.
Posted by Unitomic 2 years ago
Unitomic
I remind people that BOP is important. Pro has BOP here, and must prove his resolution. If he fails to provide arguments for his case, then Con can say anything he wants. He doesn't need to attack the resolution, simply Pro's cases for the resolution. As no case was presented, Pro never affirmed the Resolution.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Pro made no argument at all death. So between no argument and misogynystic drivel, misogynystic drivel should win
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Yes, but it's okay. I won.
Posted by kingkd 2 years ago
kingkd
WTF lol wylted u trolling?
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Do me a favor and just type that we consider this debate a tie, when you come on, and advise nobody to vote. This debate is stupid and pointless
Posted by Kaynes 2 years ago
Kaynes
Con is trolling right ? What the hell
Posted by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
Con is trolling like crazy :D
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Women shouldn't vote
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by XLAV 2 years ago
XLAV
David12NWyltedTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro because Con forfeited a round. Pro's first round was weaK and his second round wasn't even an argument that supports the resolution, therefore, the resolution wasn't fully affirmed. Con's gave a premise and his premise wasn't fully rebutted, so points to him.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
David12NWyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's only argument to affirm the resolution came in the opening round and had virtually no impact. There's no reason to agree with Pro in saying that "voting does matter and people should be involved in the political process more". The rest of the debate is irrelevant, since Pro never affirms the resolution, so Con wins arguments. Conduct to Pro for Con's round forfeit.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
David12NWyltedTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Each side has two unwarranted arguments with no clear impact in their favor that go uncontested. Pro has "voting...matter[s]" and "involve[ment] in the political process]", Con has the loss of time resulting in less time to prepare dinner for their husband and to "tak[e] care of the kids". Con's is closer to an impact and requires fewer warrants (it really wouldn't have been hard to say that time commitments require a choice), but aren't particularly broad, since they only affect married women and those with children. Pro's completely lack clear warrants, and are extremely unclear regarding their impacts, but potentially have a very broad effect, since it's inclusive of everyone who doesn't currently vote. Neither argument is particularly convincing, and I'm tempted to vote Con down because he should know better, but the clearer warrant and impact are very difficult to ignore. I vote on that clarity. Conduct to Pro for the forfeit.
Vote Placed by Unitomic 2 years ago
Unitomic
David12NWyltedTied
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: For all things said and done, Pro has BOP (as both instigator and Pro) to support his resolution. He has given absolutely no reason for his Resolution to be considered true. Wylted does not need to pro the opposite of the resolution, he needs only ensure that the resolution has not be affirmed. Since Pro's only attempt at affirmation is saying that people should vote, he fails to affirm the resolution, since saying 'people should vote people people should vote" does not explain why people should vote. To the other voters, I remind you Wylted does NOT need to show that people shouldn't want to vote. That is the False Dilemma ("if you aren't with me, you are against me").
Vote Placed by 8elB6U5THIqaSm5QhiNLVnRJA 2 years ago
8elB6U5THIqaSm5QhiNLVnRJA
David12NWyltedTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Misogyny and unfounded remarks against women and democrats. Con rebuts only that women shouldn't vote. He neither explains why they shouldn't WANT TO vote nor does he address why men shouldn't vote or want to vote. Pro upheld the resolution by being unrefuted the entire time on his baseless assertion of 'voting does matter'. This literally went unrefuted by Con who chose to only attack women and democrats.
Vote Placed by Death23 2 years ago
Death23
David12NWyltedTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con FF a round and made no serious arguments, just a bunch of misogynist drivel.