The Instigator
officialkwade
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
AbandonedSpring
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Politicians should match every campaign dollar to a charity

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: 11/17/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 384 times Debate No: 65353
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

officialkwade

Pro

Billions of dollars were spent in the last presidential election for nothing more than promotion, think of all the good that could be done if that amount of money was matched to better causes.
AbandonedSpring

Con

Hello, thanks for starting this debate!
Debate Round No. 1
officialkwade

Pro

Your welcome, yet my argument awaits a rebuttal.
AbandonedSpring

Con

Alright, i figured that was just an opening statement.

As we all know, the max amount of money a person can give to a candidate as of right now is $5,200. While I understand that there are good things that can be done with $5,200, where do you plan on getting the money from? The donator? He's a voter, who is passionate enough to give funds. The campaigner? In that case, why would he even accept a donation? It makes no sense. Also, you seem to undervalue politics, as if it is not the thing that holds this nation up. This nation was established on politics, and it is on politics it will fall. Funding is necessary for politics, because it gets the word out. Would you rather our voters just not be informed?

An informed voter is a powerful voter.

Thanks

https://www.google.com...
Debate Round No. 2
officialkwade

Pro

Informed? Many studies have been conducted where impulse voting, voting based on party alone, and name recognition based on propaganda alone were primary triggers. Aside, 38% of the voters in the last presidential election did not attend high school, when you add in those who didn't graduate as well, the number increases. The voters, or at least the ones that do vote, can statistically be well defined as uninformed. It is a sad truth and outcome of our voting system.
Undervalue politics? I undervalue what politics has ultimately become, a monetary game. The corruption and deals in politics have existed for years, think of the 1800 election, but what has changed is the influence of money from what power it had once held.
And this debate is not to establish the specifics, yet the concept. But one way this could work is after the pool of funds has been in place for the campaign, half it then. If the campaigner truly feels that his campaign is more valuable than a reputable charity, that would show the true value of that candidate. Again, this is for the concept.
AbandonedSpring

Con

"Informed? Many studies have been conducted where impulse voting, voting based on party alone, and name recognition based on propaganda alone were primary triggers. Aside, 38% of the voters in the last presidential election did not attend high school, when you add in those who didn't graduate as well, the number increases. The voters, or at least the ones that do vote, can statistically be well defined as uninformed. It is a sad truth and outcome of our voting system."

Your entire argument is invalid because you failed to cite sources. I have no where do go to fact check. However, I will do my best to argue. Of course people vote on their political party, and it annoys me, which is why I became an independent voter. But it's said person's American right to vote for who they want, so the argument is invalid, and also irrelevant.

"Undervalue politics? I undervalue what politics has ultimately become, a monetary game. The corruption and deals in politics have existed for years, think of the 1800 election, but what has changed is the influence of money from what power it had once held."

Politics has always been monetary. I can guarantee you there has never been a government that has never at one point been about monetary growth. Also, money has always held power. Are you seriously blaming the money? Money isn't the issue. Corruption existed way before the invention of paper currency. Nothing has changed. You make it sound like the world all the sudden has become bad, when I can assure you the world has been bad essentially since it's creation.

"And this debate is not to establish the specifics, yet the concept. But one way this could work is after the pool of funds has been in place for the campaign, half it then. If the campaigner truly feels that his campaign is more valuable than a reputable charity, that would show the true value of that candidate. Again, this is for the concept."

Your fall back is specifics. I offer specifics, and when you find them hard to rebut, you drop them. Concepts are a great thing, until you actually try them. Like communism. In theory, a world where are are 100% equal would be amazing. No more inequality in pay, no more racism, but somehow, when put to the test, it crumbles! Concepts don't mean anything unless you are ready to put them up to the test.

Also, it seems you have failed to show why the money should be donated. The money is donated by people or corporations to a political leader. They still are able to donate to charity, but they choose in this instance to donate to a political, who will after all be a major influence in the direction the country goes.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Are you talking to me?
Posted by AbandonedSpring 2 years ago
AbandonedSpring
Hurr durr, take away anyones source of revenue, and they will squirm. That makes no sense. Are you anti government? I just don't understand you.

Alos, I said low info voters are guaranteed the same rights. I don't understand, I never said anything else. Liberal Democrats deem to care more on the civil side. Conservatives seem to care more about themselves. I am independent, so I don't associate with either. I don't understand the point of your comment, but I really don't care either.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
abandoned.... The low information voter is just as powerful. Most political ads are lies and too many fall for it.Once you get emotions into the political process it will always be corrupted and will crush a country.Liberal domocrats thrive on emotional issues.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
How about not making government so lucrative. Take away their taxing power and they will crawl back into the woodwork where they belong.And the freeloaders would go scurrying back too.
No votes have been placed for this debate.