The Instigator
brontoraptor
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Hillary4Prez
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Positive debate Trump vs Hillary

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: 7/24/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 633 times Debate No: 94049
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

brontoraptor

Pro

This will be a positive debate. In this debate we will only point out good or positive things about our candidate. We will not attack the other's candidate and will simply try to sell our particular candidate.

Thanks. Good luck.
Hillary4Prez

Con

Thank you for this debate! Unfortunately, I am way too busy right now to post an argument. You will see my arguments in Round 2. I apologize for the inconvenience. Good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
brontoraptor

Pro

Donald Trump intro video-


*

Trump's ex-wives Ivana & Marla Maples, support him in this endeavor. That means a lot. People who have lived with him, disagreed with him, and parted ways from him, and were once married to him, still respect him and believe he is the man for the job.

*

And words are cheap. At the end of the day, actions are what matters. Some accuse Trump of misogyny. But it's a false dichotomy by ommission.


1)When polled, women were attracted to a strong, dominant alpha male. Why? Because they were "real" and would "get things done that needed done".

2)Trump has hired more female executives than men.

3)Women working under Trump say he respects women and supports women

4)Trump's "Muslim ban" shows he wants to protect women. In Islamic countries, women have no rights.

He's protecting women from this:

Excerpt from article-

"During the 2016 New Year's Eve celebrations, hundreds of sexual assaults, rape, groping, and numerous thefts were reported in Germany, mainly in Cologne city centre."

"All of the incidents involved women being surrounded and assaulted by groups of men on the street. There are more than 1,900 victims – 1,200 of whom were sexually assaulted – and police stated that at least 2,000 men were involved, acting in groups. Police reported that the perpetrators were men of "Arab or North African appearance" and said that Germany had never experienced such mass sexual assaults before."


Yes, he joked about Carly Fiorina. He also joked about Rand Paul. Get it? Or are women demanding to be coddled and spared the same treatment as the gentlemen? Surely not...

*

Temperments: Choleric

"Choleric people are leaders and directors. They seek to be in control of situations, to be on top, to be the best."

"They will 'rise to the challenge', in order to prove themselves, and look for opportunities to do so."

"They are 'thick-skinned', in many cases bulletproof against the criticisms of others, able to shrug them off."

Donald Trump has a temperment that is choleric. A choleric person speaks off the cuff. This is why Trump didn't use teleprompters through much of his campaign.

He shares this temperment with two notable men in world history. Both were ridiculed for their outspoken speech, but both were seen as heroes in the end.

*

1)FDR-

Here is FDR in the movie "Pearl Harbor"-


Quote-

"I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made."

*

2)Winston Churchill

Quote-

"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life."

*

Why Trump?

1)He is not your ordinary politician. Yes, Trump is different. Guess what? That’s a good thing.

2)Trump is not reliant on donors. This cannot be overstated enough. Not relying on donors, especially not following the typical politician model of huge support from just a handful of donors, is crucial. No one will own Trump.

3)Diplomacy. We keep hearing Trump isn’t “diplomatic.” Interestingly, though, it is Trump who is willing to sit across the table and actually talk to Vladimir Putin.

4)An awesome first family. We can easily forget that we are not only choosing a president but choosing a First Family. You can't fake good kids.

“He spent his career with regular Americans. He hung out with the guys on construction sites, hanging sheet rock and pouring concrete."

-Donald Trump Jr.(on his father)

*

And then there is Mike Pence, the governor of Indiana and Trump's VP.

Indiana has had AAA credit ratings with the three major credit-rating agencies since 2010, before Pence took office; these ratings been maintained through Pence's tenure.


Mike Pence at RNC-

(Video for those interested)


*

The point? Everyone points to Trump's temperment, but it is a temperment he shares with the greatest leaders of all time. We aren't picking a President to be a PC expert, a coward, or someone who has mastered lip service. We are picking a President to protect this great nation and get things done in a time when the West is in danger from radical Islamic terrorism. A vote for Trump is to protect women's and LGBT rights by defending against those who ideologically are commanded to submit and/or kill these demographics.

www.azquotes.com/quote/1485455






mobile.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/f/franklind135688.html

www.nationalreview.com/article/436505/mass-shooting-florida-anti-gay-violence-rooted-muslim-law
Hillary4Prez

Con

First I will make my arguments for my own candidate. I will respond to your arguments in the following rounds. Here they are.

1. Women's Rights (https://www.hillaryclinton.com......)

As president, Hillary will be a strong defender of women's rights in the United States and abroad. She has pledged to eliminate the gender pay gap that prevents women from earning as much for the same amount of work as their male counterparts. Women only earn 79 cents to every dollar that a man makes. (http://www.iwpr.org......) It's a sexist double standard that preventshalf of the world's population from living up to their full potential. To fight it, Hillary will push for the passing of the Paycheck Fairness Act (https://www.congress.gov......). Hillary has also pledged to create paid parental leave so that new mothers and fathers may properly care for their newborn child without sacrificing their careers or other opportunities.

Hillary has also pledged to protect women's reproductive rights. No one should be able to restrict access for necessary women's health services and birth control. That's why she's standing with Planned Parenthood so that easy access to women's health clinics and services can be protected.

2. Gun Control (https://www.hillaryclinton.com......)

We cannot live in a country where first graders are killed inside their own schools, places of love and nurturing. We cannot continue to live in a country where your gender and sexual identity gets you killed by a man with an assault rifle. We cannot live in a society where people are afraid to step outside of their own houses. In light of the mass shootings in Orlando, San Bernardino, Charleston, Sandy Hook, Aurora, and others, we must take strong action and finally create adequate gun control. Hillary has pledged to eliminate the Charleston loophole that allowed Dylann Roof to buy the gun that killed nine people at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in South Carolina. She has pledged to put into action policies that will prevent suspected terrorists and people on the no-fly list from buying guns. It's just common sense.

3. Campaign Finance Reform (https://www.hillaryclinton.com......)

Hillary will nominate judges that will overturn Citizens United, one of the worst Supreme Court rulings in American history. Why should some people get more say than others over who wins elections simply because they have more money? The power of multimillionaires and billionaires to buy elections is appalling. How is this democracy? How have we allowed this to happen? Campaign finance laws allow everybody to get an equal say in politics. The rich and powerful must not continue to be the only people who have the ability to influence our politics. This must stop.

4. Climate Change (https://www.hillaryclinton.com......)

Let's face it--the Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. To stop it, we must invest in clean energy infrastructure (primarily wind and solar) so that the environment and atmosphere that we all rely on for survival. Hillary has promised to invest in this infrastrucure on day one so that the United States can begin to transition to more renewable energy sources and lead the world in clean energy production. She will cut oil and gas subsidies and instead invest in clean energy companies. She will also impose new emissions standards for vehicles and manufactures in order to limit the harmful greenhouse gases that are being put into our atmosphere, causing dramatic melting of polar ice, desertification, and extreme weather patterns that devastate coastal communities. (http://climate.nasa.gov......)

5. Tax Reform (https://www.hillaryclinton.com...)

As president, Hillary will cut taxes for small businesses to allow communities to grow, close tax loopholes for the rich and powerful so that the people at the top pay their fair share in taxes.

6. Higher Education (https://www.hillaryclinton.com...)

Under a Clinton presidency, community colleges would be tuition free, and in-state public colleges would be debt-free by 2021. Any college debt remaining after 20 years will automatically forgiven.

This is essential for the United States to remain the leading economy in the world. We must recognize education as a right rather than a privilege so that all people, not just the wealthy and well-connected, can experience the American dream.

7. Immigration (https://www.hillaryclinton.com...)

Hillary will push for comprehensive immigration reform from day one. She supports a path to citizenship so that families can all have access to the opportunity that you and I take for granted. We can't react to the pains of globalization by telling people who want to live in a country where they can work hard for their dreams rather than live in an ever-deepening cycle of poverty.

This is just the base for my arguments and they will be elaborated upon in further rounds.

Looking forward to my opponent's response!
Debate Round No. 2
brontoraptor

Pro

Con:
"we must take strong action and finally create adequate gun control."


France has the strictest guncontrol laws in the EU and yet has been the target of more terrorist attacks for the same reason. The terrorists don't care about gun laws, so guess what? Stricter gun control disams law abiding citizens while the non law abiding citizens are still packing.




"To conquer a nation, first disarm its citizens."-Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf






*


Con:
"Why should some people get more say than others over who wins elections simply because they have more money?"


Which was how Hillary beat Bernie Sanders.






*


Con:
"As president, Hillary will be a strong defender of women's rights in the United States and abroad."


Unless they are raped.










*


Con:
"The power of multimillionaires and billionaires to buy elections is appalling."


"Hillary bought the Super delegates"




-"Hillary and Bill Clinton made a combined $141 million and paid $43.9 million in taxes between 2007 and 2014, according to new tax-return information released by Clinton's campaign Friday evening." Since leaving the Whitehouse they have accumulated $230 million.




That's odd. The President, the highest paid elected official, only makes $400,000 a year. Where'd that money come from?




www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2015/10/13/how-the-clintons-made-more-than-230-million-after-leaving-the-white-house/#6973881d791e


*


Con:
"Let's face it--the Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate."


Unless you ask an actual scientist.








*


Con:
"Tax Reform"


We need the Democrats away from anything financial. The last time they made promised related to any economical construct, they emposed a penalty on people who couldn't afford health insurance. Keep their hand out of that cookie jar.




*


Con:
"She will also impose new emissions standards for vehicles and manufactures in order to limit the harmful greenhouse gases that are being put into our atmosphere, causing dramatic melting of polar ice, desertification, and extreme weather patterns that devastate coastal communities."


The Dems have promised this since I was a child. Then they killed the electric car, and we are still waiting for them to fulfill just one promise in this regard. It's lip service.




*


Con:
"We can't react to the pains of globalization by telling people who want to live in a country where they can work hard for their dreams rather than live in an ever-deepening cycle of poverty."


And then they come here and live in poverty because they can't speak English or get a job, weighing down an already beaten down welfare system and creating closed pocketed ghettos.


Ayaan Hirsi Ali Quote-


"In the real world, equal respect for all cultures doesn't translate into a rich mosaic of colorful and proud peoples interacting peacefully while maintaining a delightful diversity of food and craftwork. It translates into closed pockets of oppression, ignorance, and abuse."
*
I'll let Con in on a secret that grownups well understand. The Democrats talk a good show. Then? They rarely and almost never deliver. Never. We are $19 trillion+ in debt, and China is selling off our debt. Who would want to lend to us? We are running out of lenders, and without unsermountable loans, the Democrats can afford not a one of their promises, not that they fulfilled hardly any of them when we actually had the funds.


Don't take my word for it.


A compilation of Obama's promises. We're still waiting...




*

Con:
"Under a Clinton presidency, community colleges would be tuition free..."


This is a complete pipedream. They've scurried around for decades to try and find ways to fund social security as it continues to nosedive because the money isn't there. This is a 100% deceptionized carrot to steal the vote of young people. They can't give you what they cannot afford.
Hillary4Prez

Con

Well, since this is a positive debate, I will first defend my own arguments. Your rebuttals to my arguments carry negative information, which is in violation of your own rules, which say, "In this debate we will only point out good or positive things...We will not attack the other's candidate and will simply try to sell our particular candidate." In my interpretation, it is fair to rebuke policies proponed but not to attack the other candidate directly. Thus, as per the rules, I will respond to the policy points you made, but refrain from responding to your personal attacks on Hillary. In my rebuttals to your arguments, I will not post any negative information about Trump himself, but rather respond to his policies which you indicate. If my interpretation of these rules is incorrect, please inform me. They were fairly vague in terms of rebuttals, so I suggest you revise them in the next round for maximum clarity.

You imply that more guns implies more safety. If this were true, then the country with the most guns would have the least gun deaths, right? Let's fact-check this.

The United States leads in per-capita gun ownership worldwide. There are 112.6 guns for every 100 citizens; more than enough for everybody to have one gun. This is followed by Serbia, Yemen, Switzerland, and Cyprus. (https://en.wikipedia.org...) The United States, contrary to your claim, leads in gun deaths among developed countries (https://en.wikipedia.org...). Thus, stricter gun laws and background checks do not make citizens less safe.

Rather than endangering people, gun control makes people safer. According to Columbia University, both universal background checks on gun purchases and background checks for ammunition purchases can dramatically reduce gun violence. Checks on gun purchases could reduce gun violence by 56.6% and ammunition checks could reduce it by 80.6%. (https://www.law.columbia.edu...) over 31,000 Americans die each year from gun injuries, so ammunition background checks could save 25,000 lives each year and gun background checks could save 17,500 American lives each year.

Your next three statements, about how Hillary beat Bernie, women's rights, and buying the superdelegates are all personal attacks, so I will not respond to them until you make it clear that these arguments were in agreement with your rules.

Next you ask where the Clintons got all there money. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to get at here, but your second source, from Forbes, gives you the answer to your question. There's a handy little pie chart right at the top of the article that shows that they got their money from speaking, writing, consulting, and advising.

Then you claim that climate change doesn't exist, saying an "actual" scientist doesn't believe in climate change. I disagree. According to NASA, 97% of climate scientists are in agreement that climate change is real and is caused by human activity. (http://climate.nasa.gov...) So perhaps if you ask one scientist, as you imply, you'll find someone who doesn't believe in the existence of climate change. But if you were to ask, say, one hundred scientists, you would get an overwhelming concensus that climate change is real and human-caused.

Next you say that the Democrats will botch financial and tax reform. First of all, your claim that you make is completely false, as proved by your own article. At the very top of the page, it very clearly says, "If you can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it, you must pay a fee called the individual shared responsibility payment." The point: You only get fined if you can afford it but choose not to get insured! Thus, your claim that the Democrats "emposed [sic] a penalty on people who couldn't afford health insurance" is false.

Then you say that Democrats killed the electric car. Again, according to the movie that you cited, this is not true. In the summary article you gave me, the documentary mentions as the possible killers of the car:

-U.S. Consumers

-Battery Companies

-Car Companies

-Oil Companies

-The Hydrogen Fuel Cell

-California Air Resources Board

-The George W. Bush administration

As you can see, the only political culprit listed on that list is Bush, who, as we both know, was a Republican and not a Democrat.

So you claim that Democrats haven't done anything to combat climate change? They would, if Republicans would stop fighting it. The recent COP 21 climate change deal came out with a treaty that would significantly reduce emissions. President Obama was at the conference and supports it. However, Republicans in Congress are trying to kill it. (http://thehill.com...)

About immigration--you are implying that no non-English speaking immigrants should be admitted into the country, which would kill our economy and our standing in the world. Anybody, provided that they have been safely vetted, should be allowed citizenship. We can't build walls to keep people out. As a nation of immigrants, it's against our basic American values.

You say Obama and, by extension, the Democratic Party, has broken almost all of its promises. Not so. According to Politifact, Obama has kept the vast majority of his promises. _http://www.politifact.com...)

Finally, you say that we cannot make community colleges free. If other countries can make four-year colleges free, why can't we make two year community colleges free? The United States has the largest economy in the world. (https://en.wikipedia.org...(nominal)) What possible sort of economic barrier could be preventing us from doing this? Much smaller countries with much smaller economies have done this and more. Why can't we acheive the same thing they did?

I would love to respond to your main arguments now, but I will refrain from doing so until you clarify your rules.

Eagerly awaiting my opponent's response!
Debate Round No. 3
brontoraptor

Pro

Con:
"You imply that more guns implies more safety. If this were true, then the country with the most guns would have the least gun deaths, right?"


"The United States, contrary to your claim, leads in gun deaths among developed countries. Thus, stricter gun laws and background checks do not make citizens less safe."


This is the equivalent of seeing a dog's tail wag, hitting off a light switch, and now assuming the dog's tail is the reason lights turn off. Just because something happens in one instance, that doesn't make it the cause. There are many things relsted to violence like:


1)Culture
2)Upbringing
3)Television, movies, social media, youtube...
4)Not inforcing the gun laws you have.
5)Suicides...


I could say, "no one has assassinated Obama, thus guns kept him safe, seeing the secret service carry them. Maybe, maybe not.


*


Con brought up this link.




What is left out is that suicide is by far the leading cause of gun death in the U.S. People aren't using guns typically to kill each other, but to kill themselves. If they had no guns, they'd use pills, razor blades, ropes, etc, or screw the law and use a gun anyway. People getting ready to off themselves have no concern for gun laws.


-"More than 60 percent of people in this country who die from guns die by suicide."


Con:
"Checks on gun purchases could reduce gun violence by 56.6%"


1)Columbia Univ. is a liberal agenda machine, as are many universities nowadays.




2)It would reduce gun related suicides, and...


We know who will have guns no matter what the law says:


-terrorists
-the government
-criminals




So essentially we would rob Peter to pay Paul.


-Gun suicides might go down
-Suicides by other methods would go up.


-Gun deaths of the innocent by terrorism or criminal activity go up per the people being unarmed.


*


Con:
"There's a handy little pie chart right at the top of the article that shows that they got their money from speaking, writing, consulting, and advising."


To? Banks, investment firms, Goldman Sachs and repeatedly...Which is how lobbyists hand money under the table. $600,000+ for one speech? Uh huh...when pigs fly. And then the contents of many of these "speeches" seems to be classified information...


So she does know how to keep things classified...just as I suspected.








*


Con:
"You only get fined if you can afford it but choose not to get insured!"


Everyone I know that had no insurance got fined, including people like my cousin on welfare.
*
Con:
"About immigration--you are implying that no non-English speaking immigrants should be admitted into the country, which would kill our economy."


Con admits the Democrats are practicing plantation politics. They are being brought in for cheap labor and not some crusade to "do the right thing". The Liberals are bringing in slaves to do the labor. This is the madness that constitutes Democrat politicians "whoring for votes" from minorities. "We'll toss you some scraps if you keep us in power."


If we used primarily our own people for labor, wages would go up, unemployment would go down, violence and crime would go down, and people needing welfare would go down.


*


Con:
"As a nation of immigrants, it's against our basic American values."


This is a deceptive concept. Most of the country is Christian, but most liberals get huffy if you say Christianity is "where we got our American values". If Christianity is not "where we got our American values", I don't remember a vote on what "our values" are. Why can't we have the "value" of shutting down borders to protect our children and citizens? Half of the country does not adhere to Con's concept of "American values", seeing liberalism as selling out the country to foreign oligarchs and other cultures inferior to our own. Can 350,000,000 people not repopulate and run this country? At some point we have to realise that our enemies are from foreign cultures, want to infiltrate our borders, and even want to infiltrate our government to change our laws based on non-Westernised concepts like democracy.


*


Con:
"According to Politifact, Obama has kept the vast majority of his promises."


Just not the big ones that got him elected...


But he did pull all our troops out...and the Middle East became a hell hole and Europe is in crisis from overflux of Middle Eastern assylum seekers and refugees, taxing their law enforcement to exhaustion, breaking their welfare system, causing crimewaves, ghettos, rape epidemics, and skyrocketed unemployment via these non native language speeking asylum seekers who have no education or skills, and is even causing a race divide, hatred by migrants towards the hosting nation, and serious accusationd of possible civil wars. Liberalism at work...


*


Con:
"What possible sort of economic barrier could be preventing us from doing this?"


1)The same one that keeps them threatening to ditch social security because we can't afford it anymore.


2)$19 trillion in unpaid debt. That far exceeds our GDP. Now the debt has put us in danger of inability to get a foreign loan. That is very problematic.


Free schools-


1)What this does is handicap the school system with the inability to pay professors well, so the level of education goes down. What great mind would want to go to school for 10-12 years to be a professor for meager wages?
The system in place now provides grants for poorer students and charges the rich full price. Free tuition just gives the rich who receive no grants, free tuition. And now that the wealthier families have more and the poor have a little more, the prices of consumer products go up. The poor wind up with a tradeoff that redistributes more from their pocket to the rich.




*


Con:
"I would love to respond to your main arguments."


Go ahead.
Hillary4Prez

Con

Round 1 rebuttals:

About his family supporting him: Hillary's family supports her as well. Since your statement goes for both candidates, it cannot truly be seen as an argument specifically for Mr. Trump.

You say that words are cheap and actions are what matter. Let's review what Trump has done: He has outsourced his products to "Bangladesh, China, Honduras, and other low-wage countries." (https://www.washingtonpost.com...)And yet he says, "We need somebody that can take our jobs back from China." (https://www.washingtonpost.com...) You can't get much more hypocritical than that. His businesses have filed for corporate bankruptcy four times, and he says, "I'm going to do for the country what I did for my business." (https://www.theguardian.com...) This is why we can never let this man become president.

1) According to the latest Pew Research Poll, Hillary leads Trump among women by a whopping 16%. (http://www.pewresearch.org...)

2) Well, good for him. He still said, "You have to treat [women] like s**t." (http://www.politico.com...)

3) What about his recent remarks when he said that women should find new jobs if they are sexually harassed? (http://www.usatoday.com...) Nobody should have to leave their career because of harassment. That doesn't seem like respect or support to me.

4) Again, this goes for both candidates. They are both trying to find ways to protect the country from attacks like the one you mention. Donald Trump's method, however, is overly simplistic and not appropriate for a complex situation such as the refugee crisis. Hillary, however, is dedicated to finding smarter vetting strategies that will keep our country safe while granting refuge to people fleeing violence.

Choleric personality: Well, first of all, choleric doesn't mean what you say it means.

Choleric: 1.easily moved to often unreasonable or excessive anger: hot-tempered
2.angry;irate

(http://www.merriam-webster.com...) But I'll just assume for a moment that it means what you say it means. I would like to point out that Clinton also has this temperament.

"Leaders and directors": Hillary has served two terms as a senator, has been the First Lady of the United States, and served for four years as Secretary of State.

"Will rise to the challenge": After her husband's comprehensive health care reform bill failed, Hillary led the charge to create the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which gave millions of children access to health insurance. (https://en.wikipedia.org...)

"Thick-skinned": Hillary has been vilified by men and women of both parties for decades. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com...) No matter what you think of her policies, you have to admire that she continues to fight for what she believes in. Thus, this is also not really an argument for Mr. Trump, as it applies to both candidates.

Why Trump? rebuttals

1. No, he is not an ordinary politician. And no, that's not necessarily a good thing. A politician is not an inherently bad thing to be. The two brilliant men you mentioned earlier, Roosevelt and Churchill, were both politicians. Unless you can prove that all politicians are immoral or dishonest people, this argument is invalid.

2. Well, "this cannot be overstated enough" is an oxymoron, but I get your point. However, unless you can prove that Hillary is corrupt, then this point is really irrelevant.

3. Yes, Trump is willing to talk to Putin. So are Obama and Hillary. The current president has held several meetings with Putin. (http://www.cnn.com...) The difference between Hillary and Trump is that Trump has repeatedly praised dictators such as Kim Jong Un, Gadhafi, Saddam Hussein, and Vladimir Putin. (http://www.cnn.com...) Meanwhile, he picks fights with the U.K., our closest ally, and threatens to abandon our allies in NATO, leaving the door open for Putin to invade the Baltic States without much opposition.

4. This point is rather irrelevant because the first family doesn't have any power. Why does the first family really matter?

Mike Pence:

You say that Indiana has had AAA ratings since 2010; actually it was July of 2008. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com...)That's about five years before Pence took office, implying that the state was enjoying a general economic upswing. Pence doesn't have much to do with it. Mike Pence also has a long record of being anti-LGBT and anti-women's rights. In March of 2015, he signed a bill that allowed businesses to discriminate against gay, lesbian, or transgender people. In 2011, he forwarded an amendment to defund Planned Parenthood. He has said gay marriage signals "societal collapse" and opposed the repeal of the U.S. Military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. Do we want someone who is so blatantly anti-LGBT and anti-women's rights as the closest advisor to the president?

http://time.com...

http://www.motherjones.com...

I will make some of my rebuttals to your Round 4 arguments now and some in the next round because I am running low on characters.

You have a good point about culture, upbringing, and the like. We can simply compare our statistics here in the United States with other countries with similar cultures (such as Canada and Western Europe) to test my claim. As you can see by the articles I cited earlier and their statistics about per capita gun deaths, this still holds true.

Pro: "Columbia Univ. is a liberal agenda machine, as are many universities nowadays." Read their methods for their research. (http://www.thelancet.com...(15)01026-0/abstract) As long as there is nothing that would indicate bias in the study methods, this information is still valid.

Pro: "More than 60 percent of people in this country who die from guns die from suicide."

In that case, gun control would still save about 7,020 American lives every year. How could this possibly be a bad decision?

Unfortunately, I've run out of characters. I will respond to the rest of your Round 4 arguments next round.

Thank you!
Debate Round No. 4
brontoraptor

Pro

Con:
"He has outsourced his products to "Bangladesh, China, Honduras, and other low-wage countries."


This is because doing business in the U.S. is not typically beneficial from a business perspective. Per Bill Clinton's scandal and conspiracy with Chinese oligarchs in the 1990's, ending in an even more disastrous free trade agreement that helped other nations, the U.S. essentially got screwed even harder. Bill was bought off by the Chinese in a scandal that was called "Chinagate".




I'll let Donald Trump himself tell you about free trade and why he had no choice from a business standpoint to do business in foreign countries. He's been griping about the American system since I was a child and how it only works for foreign nations.


(Video)




*


Con:
"And yet he says, "We need somebody that can take our jobs back from China."


We do. He made his fortune, and now it's time to give back and get the U.S. back on top. He knows that at this rate there won't be an America left for long. Making more money is meaningless to him at this point in his life. According to himself the goals are:


1)Make sure his kids have a nation left to exist in.


2)Pay back the nation he loves.


3)Make it right with "God's people"and protect them.


*


Con:
"You can't get much more hypocritical than that."


Sure you can. Wanna see?


(Video)




*


Con challenged my definition of choleric.


Choleric: 1.easily moved to often unreasonable or excessive anger: hot-tempered

2.angry;irate


Then said Hillary had a choleric temperment.


*


Con:
"Hillary has served two terms as a senator, has been the First Lady of the United States, and served for four years as Secretary of State."


And got a lot of people killed.








*


Con:
"Thick-skinned": Hillary has been vilified by men and women of both parties for decades."


That's not a good sign, being constantly villified.


*


Con:
"No matter what you think of her policies, you have to admire that she continues to fight for what she believes in."


After taking money from big banks, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies, and attacking and threatening her husbands sexual assault victims, I'm not sure exactly what she actually believes in.








*


Con:
"Unless you can prove that Hillary is corrupt, then this point is really irrelevant."


I think her and Bill's corruption is common knowledge at this point

*


Con:
"Meanwhile, he picks fights with the U.K., our closest ally."


Because their immigration policies suck. They have by mindless "progressivism" dealt an ethnic, religious/secular, and feminist movement genocide to claim tollerance and multiculturism towards Islam which is commanded to conquer them, subjegate their unbelieving women, infiltrate their governments, and outbreed/interbreed them per the Quran and the Islamic global fatwahs.


*


Con:
"That's about five years before Pence took office."


And he kept it going in this direction. The Obama/Clinton Presidency has outspent all 43 other Presidents combined accumulating $19 trillion in debt.


*


Con:
"Do we want someone who is so blatantly anti-LGBT and anti-womens rights as closest advisor to the president?"


Trump is very moderate on LGBT rights and wants to protect them from Islamic extremism.


Huma Abedin, Hillary's closest associate is all of those things but on steroids. Christians make claims but typically are not actually dangerous and can coexist. Muslim ideology makes them extremely dangerous and deceptive per fatwahs, taqiya, and muruna. This is why there were no secular or Christian suicide bombers in 2015. Out of 452 suicide bombings 99.9% were Muslims. Why?




Huma Mahsood Abedin link-




(Video)




Bill Maher, liberal Atheist tells us the difference between Christianity and Islam-


(Video)




*


Con:
"Gun control would still save about 7,020 American lives every year."


It won't save lives. 7,020 people will ignore the law and use a gun anyways. What are we going to do, arrest their corpse? Or 7,020 people will commit suicides by other means. And...law abiding citizens will be the only people actually disarmed as criminals and terrorists will wad the law into a ball and toss it in the garbage and...still be armed.


*


The new "Hillary's America" trailer-




*
*


Donald Trump Larry King interview 1980's-


(Video)


http://youtu.be...


Let's take America back from the status quo elites, fatcats, and political terrorists like the Clintons and get this country going again folks. God bless.
Hillary4Prez

Con

Round 4 Rebuttals Part 2:

Pro: "To? Banks, investment firms, Goldman Sachs..." As a former Bernie supporter, I agree with you that Hillary should release the transcripts. However, you provide no evidence that these paid speeches have made her change her policies in any way, so this claim is negated.

Pro: "Everyone I know that had no insurance got fined." Apparently they could afford it, or your own source is false.

And no, I do not admit that the Democratic Party is practicing "plantation politics." The economic argument is merely a more practical one; the primary reason for allowing in immigrants is to help them get away from the cycle of poverty and into a better life. Just because I may make practical rather than moral arguments at times does not mean that I do not believe in moral arguments as well.

Pro: "Most of the country is Christian, but most liberals get huffy if you say Christianity is 'where we got our American values.'" Let's assume then, for the sake of argument, that our values came from Christianity. It would logically follow that our values would come from the Bible. But the Bible also tells us to be accepting to immigrants and foreign cultures.

Leviticus 19:34:

The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

Thus you are agreeing with me, as you claim that our values are Christian values, which support my claim.

Next you say Obama caused the current chaos in the Middle East. First of all, the modern politics of the Middle East were created when Britain and France made the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which caused most of the underlying roots of conflict today. (https://www.theguardian.com...) To be more specific, ISIS was not caused by Obama but rather George W. Bush, whose war in Iraq caused a power vacuum which allowed the Islamic State and other terrorist groups to take hold.

You then say our national debt exceeds our GDP and thus we cannot pay for community college. First of all, the United States' debt-to-GDP ratio is far from being the largest. In fact, we are 9th, being led by countries such as Japan and Italy. Japan's debt-to-GDP ratio is more than twice that of the United States. Just behind us in 10th is Belgium, a country known for its socialized healthcare and higher education services.(http://www.statista.com...) Again, you fail to offer a reason why the United States is uniquely unable to provide these services to the people.

In the interest of fairness, I will not respond to your Round 5 arguments. You do not get to respond to my arguments in the last round, so I should not be able to respond to yours.

Thank you for a great debate!
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by brontoraptor 9 months ago
brontoraptor
The Donald Trump- Larry King interview from 1980's

http://youtu.be...
Posted by brontoraptor 10 months ago
brontoraptor
Sure.
Posted by Hillary4Prez 10 months ago
Hillary4Prez
Can I post my arguments in Round 1 or is it acceptance only?
No votes have been placed for this debate.