The Instigator
epicray1
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Baker532
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Political Parties Should Not Exist

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/24/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 508 times Debate No: 80119
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

epicray1

Pro

Anyone can accept and I would like Con to present his/her argument in the first round of the debate. Thank you.
Baker532

Con

I would to thank the pro for allowing me to take part in such an interesting debate.

Definitions:
Political Party: A political party is an organization of people which seeks to achieve goals common to its members through the acquisition and exercise of political power.

Democratic Party: The Democratic Party is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States, along with the Republican Party to its right.

Political Parties are essential to our nation's overall development for they aid in defining the beliefs and positions of potential voters on crucial issues. In truth, the political parties have the similar duties in the field of politics as different denominations have in theology and religion. The different political parties represent the multiple opinions within a society.
Debate Round No. 1
epicray1

Pro

epicray1 forfeited this round.
Baker532

Con

My opponent has forfeited. Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 2
epicray1

Pro

On the surface, political parties seem like a good idea. However, when we analyze what effect they have had on our nation, they are hardly anything beneficial. You stated that you believed that political parties are "essential to our nation's overall development for they aid in defining the beliefs and positions of potential voters on crucial issues." This, however, is not true.

Many voters today only vote for different political candidates only because they are Democrat or Republican. This leaves voters uneducated about what the different political candidates actually believe in and what effect they might have, which leaves them vulnerable to be able to be taken advantage of. Many of the political candidates today are just buying votes instead of actually voicing how they will help a country and actually moving a country in the right direction. The different political parties only create unfair voter bias for some candidates and leave most voters uneducated.

By taking away political parties, voters would not just vote for a candidate because the candidate is a Republican or a Democrat. They would have to be educated about each candidate, which would mean that they would vote better candidates into office. I have a lot more arguments to support my case, but for now, I would like to hear more of your arguments.

Sources: One Nation by Ben Carson (although I do not like Ben Carson, I do agree with him on some subjects)
http://www.debate.org...
Baker532

Con

First off, I would like to address the invalidity of Pro's last argument. He says that because voters select candidates on political affiliation alone, that the political parties should be abolished. The one negative Pro has presented, namely, the ignorance of the average American, compared to the several benefits presented by myself, is nearly insignificant.

  • Running candidates for political office. Parties select candidates for many elected positions in American politics. With so many officials to choose, most voters would be overwhelmed by the decisions they would have to make if candidates did not wear party "labels." Parties present policy alternatives for voters. Some voters even choose a straight ticket, or candidates from the same party for all positions in that election.

  • Checking the other party. A party that does not hold the majority in Congress often keeps the party in power from taking complete control. Party leaders can publicly criticize actions of a President who was elected by the opposite party. The criticism of "PARTISANSHIP" comes from this party role because many Americans think that the "checking" becomes petty and self-serving.

  • Informing the public.Parties take stands on issues and criticize the points of view of the other parties. Their well-publicized discussions help to inform citizens about important issues and present alternative ways of solving societal problems.

  • Organizing the government.Congress and the state legislatures are organized according to party affiliations. LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVES usually support their party's position when considering potential laws and policies, and most votes fall roughly along party lines. Virtually all candidates run for public office with party labels that define their behavior after they win.
Thank you for reading
Debate Round No. 3
epicray1

Pro

Good argument, but unfortunately, the points you brought up are just not how it is these days in America. Most Americans are very biased towards only one political party. For instance, a few weeks ago, I met a lady who was a big supporter of pretty much every Republican presidential candidate. When I asked her about what she thought about the Democrats, she angrily responded by saying that no Democrats are good enough to be president and that there is no need to consider them much. Unfortunately, I have met many more people like this. Americans are biased towards one party while not even considering the other party and blindly following their favored party without looking at all the facts.

You also stated that political parties create an organized government and an organized way for voters to vote. While this is true, this "organized government" would not work out as the voters would pay TOO much attention to labels without actually checking the facts. The benefits of you argument just do not outweigh the negatives. Theoretically, your arguments sounds like a good idea, but, just like socialism and communism, these ideas sound good theoretically but have not worked out well in real life. Many of the people the voters elect these days are not qualified to run our country at all as they are just buying votes and tricking voters with their political party.

Finally, you stated that political parties are beneficial because they can keep checks and balances on each other and can inform the public about each other. Unfortunately, many Republicans and Democrats these days are NOT keeping checks and balances on each other but are instead trying to make their political party's agenda the way of the government. Political parties are basically trying to shove their ideologies down the government's throat. With no political parties, the different positions in the government can still keep checks and balances on each other to make sure nobody gets too much power. Also, as my arguments have clearly shown, political parties are not informing the public but are instead making the public biased and making voters uneducated as the voters are only voting for their favored party without looking at the facts.
Baker532

Con

Baker532 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Baker532 1 year ago
Baker532
It happens, no big deal.
Posted by epicray1 1 year ago
epicray1
Sorry for forfeiting a round. I was busy.
No votes have been placed for this debate.