Politicians are bad for America
Debate Rounds (3)
Contention Two: Politicians will only work to serve their political party and ignore the views of everyone else.
Contention Three: Politicians have little expierience when it comes to the actual lives of people. For example, few have served in the armed forces yet the President commands all of America's military.
Contention 1: The US politicians work for the greater good for the people
Subpoint A: They appease what the people want
Subpoint B: They focus on a wide scale of issues
Subpoint C: Their goal is to appeal to people
Subpoint D: In order to be reelected, they must have done enough to please the people
Contention 2: Politicians try their best given what they have
Subpoint A: Most presidents are thrown into high debt situations due to lobbyists
Subpoint B: Their spending is meant to go towards benefitting the people
Your subpoints A, C, and D are all the same, and by what I have said above, they are refuted.
Your subpoint B is completely irrelevent because that is just to achieve support, and they only do the minnimum to please them.
Your second contention is also not true. This is because they only do the minnimum to get as I have already said, they don't try their best.
Your A subpoint is just another example of how politicians are bad. Lobbyists are only trying to rack up more votes regardless of whether it hurts America or not. The debt would be much lower without them.
Your B subpoint is irrelevent because they only spend money to benefit themseleves by racking up votes. Politicians are just lobbyists.
For your second contention, this claim isn't actually true. If they only appeal to their party, they will get voted down in congress by the opposing party and possibly members of their own party too since many of their viewpoints are different from each other. They have to compromise for ye needs of everyone to succeed, so their party isn't the only group at interest here. that is why the jobs bills got turned down, primarily because it didn't appeal to republican interests.
As for your last point, it doesn't matter if they didn't do what certain people for that. In military for
example, the president has multiple advisors for that and even then the generals are the ones that control war operations. So the president may have the last say but his decision is based on high rank military officers advice. Plus, in most other issues, the president has been a part of them. Most of them have been attorneys, businessmen and politicians so they have experienced a lot in life beforehand.
And for the record, Eisenhower was a general before becoming president.
Doomtime forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by cameronl35 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Better arguments from Con, conduct for FF