The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Policy Debate: Clinton vs. Trump

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Karoline.478 has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 10/16/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 797 times Debate No: 96181
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




Hello! Since we've seen a distinct lack of policy discussion in the presidential debates thus far, I expect this will be a refreshing discussion. Here we shall debate policy only--nothing about the candidates' personal characteristics. I shall argue that Hillary Clinton's policies, foreign and domestic, will be superior to Mr. Trump's, and my opponent will argue the opposite. First round is acceptance only.

Good luck and looking forward to a good debate!


Donald Trumps gun laws state that guns should not be banned. I stand firmly behind this for several reasons. Firstly countries like Switzerland for example require a gun in most households, as it turns out Switzerland is one of the safest countries to live in. Another example is Houston, Texas and Chicago, Illinois. In Chicago you can not get a concealed weapon permit and there are no dedicated gun stores, there were 1,806 homicides reported in 2012. In Houston on the other hand guns are bought often. There are 184 gun dedicated stores and concealed weapons are legal, in 2012 there were 207 homicides. That's a whopping 1,599 difference in homicides. Also not to mention the second amendment of the constitution "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." banning guns would contradict the second amendment though possible to change the second amendment it was created for a reason. Guns actually prevent crime, not the opposite and should not be banned. Donald Trump sees it this way and will lead America into a safer country for all of us.
Debate Round No. 1


I forgot to mention that BoP is shared. Sorry about that! :)

Also, before I start, could you provide sources for your claims? Just add them in the comments or something.

i. Taxes

Hillary will cut taxes for small businesses nationwide so that they can prosper and grow. She will close tax loopholes for the rich and make sure that the most prosperous are not paying less than the middle class in taxes. Seems pretty straightforward, so I'm going to leave it at that.

Trump's tax policy (, on the other hand, which involves a dramatic tax cut, will raise the national debt, according to the Tax Policy Center, "by an estimated 39 percent of GDP in 2026 and by nearly 80 percent of GDP by 2036." ( [full report here:] The Trump plan also would reduce the incentive to donate to charity by lowering possible charitable tax deductions. Considering that Trump plans massive spending projects such as massively growing the military, tripling border enforcement, and others, our national debt would skyrocket if Mr. Trump were to be elected.

ii. Gun policy

Hillary will fight for the proposed "No Fly, No Buy" legislation that prevents suspected terrorists from buying guns or ammunition. She will fight for stronger background checks and close the "Charleston loophole" that allows people to bypass background checks after three days have passed.

Our gun policy has so many gaping holes, in fact, that terrorists cite it in their recruitment videos. An Al-Qaeda spokesman in a 2011 video said, "America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle without a background check and most likely without having to show an identification card...So what are you waiting for?"

Generally when terrorists talk of "easily obtainable firearms" as a reason to go out and commit terror attacks, it's an indicator that we may have a problem. But Mr. Trump wants none of this, and instead wants to loosen background checks and other regulations. doesn't make very much sense to me.

iii. Counterterrorism

Clinton has a detailed plan to take out the Islamic State--she would seek to take out its top leaders, such as al-Baghdadi, continue airstrikes, and partner with the Kurdish and Iraqi troops on the ground to take out Islamic State strongholds. (

Trump, on the other hand, has no such detailed plan, other than "Bomb the sh*t" out of them. Does that sound like much of a plan to you?

Next he said that his plan was secret, so that the United States could be "unpredictable," but he indicated that it would be "foolproof." When pressed to explain further on the issue, he said that he would compile a group of generals to make him a plan, which is rather concerning considering that he knows more about the Islamic State than they do. Then he said he'd fire those same generals who were supposedly the foundation of his foolproof plan. (

iv. Effect on jobs

According to an analysis by the Penn Wharton Budget model, the Trump plan would benefit the economy in the very short term, but would result in 11,000,000 lost jobs by 2040. Clinton, on the other hand, would result in slow growth over the short term, but add 2,000,000 jobs by 2040. (

I have to leave it at that for now. I will address other important issues in further rounds.

Best of luck and eagerly awaiting your response! :)


Gun laws
Gun laws are not as loose as you think they are. You need a background check, an ID card, and have to buy from a registered gun dealer to purchase a fully automatic rifle. ( Actually guns are beneficial for an area such as Houston, Texas comparing to Chicago, Illinois. In Chicago you can not get a concealed weapon permit and there are no dedicated gun stores, there were 1,806 homicides reported in 2012. In Houston on the other hand guns are bought often. There are 184 gun dedicated stores and concealed weapons are legal, in 2012 there were 207 homicides. That's a whopping 1,599 difference in homicides. ( Also not to mention the second amendment of the constitution. Guns actually prevent crime, not the opposite and should not be banned. Donald Trump sees it this way and will lead America into a safer country for all of us.


As said in the article above Hillary Clinton wants open borders. "May 16, 2013, Clinton said: "My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere." Why should we keep open borders when immigrants (I'm not saying all of them) have a possibility to propose danger to us. America's first priority should be for our safety.

Jobs and Economy

"Inequality is too high, wages are too low and it is too hard to get ahead." Hillary Clinton wants to raise minimum wages. While that sounds like a good idea at first it would ruin our economy. If we raise minimum wage everything the amount of a dollar would go down, causing everything's price to raise. People who are originally homeless would need more money to get basic needs such as food, water, and clothes because it's more expensive and it's hard to find that money. Just because we raise the minimum wage doesn't mean we'll create more jobs.
Debate Round No. 2


Thank you for your arguments.

I understand that considerable gains have been made in terms of gun control, but there is still much work to be done. The Charleston loophole that allowed Dylann Roof to kill nine people at a church in Charleston, South Carolina has yet to be closed, and suspected terrorists can still buy firearms, which allowed Omar Mateen to commit the mass shooting in Orlando. No, the solution is not to ban guns, nor is that what Hillary Clinton is proposing. I do not dispute that guns can help stop crime, but the fact is irrelevant.

The Supreme Court ruled that "reasonable regulations" on guns were perfectly constitutional. ( I think that preventing suspected terrorists from getting assault weapons is perfectly reasonable. Doesn't that seem reasonable to you?

Hillary was referring to trade, meaning she supports free trade. This type of "open border" does not mean that immigrants can pour across the border as Breitbart imagines.

Finally you say that Clinton's minimum wage hike will devalue our currency and ruin the economy, yet you don't give any evidence as to why. Many people in this country are suffering because of this--in most parts of the country people cannot live on $7.25 an hour. We need to raise the minimum wage to help these people out of the cycle of poverty and decrease income inequality. Since you have not given any direct evidence as to why the minimum wage hurts the economy, this point is void.

So sorry my arguments have been rather short. I'm swamped with homework right now.

Looking forward to your responses!


Thank you for responding to my arguments. I'm sorry that I took long to respond to your argument.

Minimum wage (
Minimum wage would also cause employers to lay of more workers. Employers will have to pay more because of the minimum wage is raised. It will make the employed have better wages but will cause others to be unemployed which raises our poverty rate. Also minimum wage would hurt small companies because they would have to pay more, because of this their workers that they employed will again raise our poverty rate.

Health Care
"Every American deserves access to high quality, affordable health care, not just insurance. Obamacare has failed on cost and quality of health care. It must be repealed. America needs a patient-centered health care system, allowing families and their doctors to be primary decision makers. Provide for the sale of health insurance across state lines." ( Donald Trump wants every American to have quality, good, affordable healthcare, and that's also what i believe in.

Thank you for your response I hope for a good rest of the debate. :)
Debate Round No. 3


I apologize--I cannot post right now. Not a forfeit, just some irl stuff came up and I can't respond. I'd like to thank you for a great debate.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Conceptua 1 year ago
You asked for votes but the debate is forfeit frozen.
Posted by JacuPro 1 year ago
Hillary's policies will change America for the worst. There is no way she can be president, she will only be more extreme than Obama. Heck, Obama probably set the stage for her even though she lost in 08. He is just handing the baton to a new criminal(I respect Obama as a president, Hillary on the other hand is a criminal).
Posted by Karoline.478 1 year ago
Ignore round one. Sorry about that 😬.
Posted by Tree_of_Death 1 year ago
I clearly stated that Round 1 was for acceptance only. In order to preserve fairness, you have the choice of either waiving the last round or we ignore your arguments in R1 (you can restate them later if you wish). Which would you prefer?
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.