The Instigator
DarthVitiosus
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points
The Contender
chrisjachimiak
Con (against)
Losing
4 Points

President Barack Obama has Developed a Shady Reputation

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 3 votes the winner is...
DarthVitiosus
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/21/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 893 times Debate No: 67398
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

DarthVitiosus

Pro

Introduction & Premises
I as Pro will be arguing in favor of the resolution. The burden of proof is on me to prove President Barack Obama has developed a shady reputation. This was not the man we expected when we first elected in 2008. Obama reputation has become shadier as time has progressed during his term in the presidency.

I will post my substansive arguments the next round.

Definitions
Shady:"Of doubtful honesty"

[1]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...

Reputation: "The beliefs or opinions that are generally held about someone or something[2]"

[2]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...

Get to the point and post your argument in the first round, none of that "I accept' nonsense.
chrisjachimiak

Con

I as con will be arguing in negation of the resolution.

Obama has proven throughout many cases that he has the authority and power of the country. The President although widely criticized by the Republican party has done many things that were honorable and were the exact opposite of shady. For example, when Bush was president and 911 occurred, what did he do? He sent in hundreds of thousands of troops and got no result. Obama on the other hand sent in a group of men who killed Osama Bin Laden. How can someone say that Barack Obama has developed a shady reputation.
Just because Obama has used his given power of an Executive order, doesn't mean that he has a shady reputation. Barack Obama being the first African American President is criticized more than any other white president has ever been. What has Barack Obama honestly done to give himself a shady reputation?
Debate Round No. 1
DarthVitiosus

Pro

REBUTTALS:
"The President although widely criticized by the Republican party has done many things that were honorable and were the exact opposite of shady."

We are not discussing what was honorable.

"For example, when Bush was president and 911 occurred, what did he do? He sent in hundreds of thousands of troops and got no result."

This is a petty attempt at a distraction. Bush is irrelevant to this debate.

"Barack Obama being the first African American President is criticized more than any other white president has ever been."

What proof do you have of that he has been " criticized more than any other white president has ever been?"

"What has Barack Obama honestly done to give himself a shady reputation?"
See below.

ARGUMENTS:
Since you have asked, here is an entire list of why he has a shady reputation:

#1. "If you like your plan you can keep it."-Barack Hussein Obama
The most infamous false statement, was it just a false statement or a lie for political gain? Obama told us that if we liked our plan we could keep it. A direct quote from Obaamcarefacts.com, "Under ObamaCare you can keep your health insurance until 2015, even if it doesn"t comply with the ACA. Come 2015, if your plan doesn"t have a grandfathered status and doesn"t meet the requirements of the ACA, then you will have to choose a new plan[1]."

[1]http://obamacarefacts.com...



#2. "Most young Americans right now, they"re not covered"-Barack Hussein Obama[2]

Only about 25%-27% of young Americans didn't have health insurance when he made the claim[2].

[2]http://www.politifact.com...

#3. "Give every American the same opportunity"-Barack Hussein Obama[3]
Obamacare had restrictions and not every American had or has the same opportunity to access Obamacare[3].


[3]http://www.politifact.com...

#4. Obama claimed preventative care saved money[4]
The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan government entity stated that prevenattive would not save money but cost more money[4].

[4]http://www.politifact.com...

#5 .""Over the last two years, health care premiums have gone up -- it's true -- but they've gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years."-Barack Hussein Obama[5]

This was a false statement, only healthcare spending declined not the costs of premiums[5]. Premiums were going up with Obamcare.

[5]http://www.politifact.com...


Shall I go on? There is plenty of more to add to his shady reputation.
chrisjachimiak

Con

You're completely wrong when saying "we are not discussing what was honorable." When discussing someone's reputation, you must look at everything they have done, whether honorable or not. That's what makes up someone's reputation. Saying that someone's reputation is just based off of quotes is a lie to everyone reading.
Moving on,

In your first argument you said, "The most infamous false statement, was it just a false statement or a lie for political gain? Obama told us that if we liked our plan we could keep it. A direct quote from Obaamcarefacts.com, "Under Obama Care you can keep your health insurance until 2015, even if it doesn't comply with the ACA. Come 2015, if your plan doesn't have a grandfathered status and doesn't meet the requirements of the ACA, then you will have to choose a new plan." This is completely wrong, if you would continue reading on your source you provided, then you would have read the special update that said,
"SPECIAL UPDATE: You can now keep your plan until 2017 in some states! The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS, i.e. the department in charge of ObamaCare) has announced that health insurance plans that were supposed to be canceled by Obamacare by 2014 may be sold through October of 2016 in states that approve of the extension. This essentially extends some non-compliant non-grandfathered plans until 2017 (a plan renewed in 2016 is good for one year, the latest date to renew your plan is October 2016)" [1]
Therefore your infamous false statement that you quoted is wrong. I would like it more if you would provide complete sources. Thanks.

[1]http://obamacarefacts.com...

In your second argument you stated that "Only about 25-27% of young Americans didn't have health insurance..." This again shows the lack of research that you have completed before accusing a president of having a shady reputation. According to my source, nearly 41 million young adults were not covered at that time. I'm not sure what basis your source was basing there numbers off of, but its wrong. [2]

[2] http://kff.org...

I have ran out of characters to type the rest of my debate. I will continue next round.
Debate Round No. 2
DarthVitiosus

Pro



"Saying that someone's reputation is just based off of quotes is a lie to everyone reading."
According to Pro's reasoning if someone has lied multiple times or said numerous false statements, we should ignore it. Essentially, Pro is stating we should ignore what people say. Pro is not a credible judge of character if this is his stance since he wants to ignore what people say.

"This is completely wrong, if you would continue reading on your source you provided, then you would have read the special update that said.....Therefore your infamous false statement that you quoted is wrong. I would like it more if you would provide complete sources. Thanks."


Con must not be reading what he is posting(look below). Where does it say that we can keep our plans? It doesn't. Therefore Con is spreading misinformation because you can't keep your plan ultimately.

"You can now keep your plan until 2017 in some states!...........This essentially extends some non-compliant non-grandfathered plans until 2017 (a plan renewed in 2016 is good for one year, the latest date to renew your plan is October 2016)"

Then it only mentions that only SOME STATES are providing an extension, not all. Con is misleading here, there is no evidence pointing to people can keep their plans indefinitely.

"According to my source, nearly 41 million young adults were not covered at that time. I'm not sure what basis your source was basing there numbers off of, but its wrong."

My opponent used an inferior resource to point out young adults that aren't covered. That show my opponent didn't even bother reading the link I posted. The source used the U.S. Census Bureau data from 2012 which clearly pointed out that majority of young adults were covered. A private foundation does not collect the same amount of data compared to the U.S. Census Bureau. The source is also invalid because it is left leaning and clearly has an agenda. The US Census Bureau is nonpartisan and just collects data without an agenda.

[1]http://www.census.gov...

My opponent hasn't refuted anything I have said. We can't keep our health plans yet Obama told us we could keep it. Now, people are paying the consequences from this lie. pople have had to adjust their plans while some may have had to pay higher costs for their new plans. Obama had numerous lies to tell us about Obamacare. Yet my opponent has not been able to refute a single one of them. We have a good undertanding of the Obama administartion when Jonathan Gruber told us, "the lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the average American voter or whatever, but basically taht was really really critical for the thing to pass[2]." Is this not shady? It is very shady.

[2]http://dailycaller.com...

I would say emphatically, Vote Pro.
chrisjachimiak

Con

chrisjachimiak forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
@Lexus, WTF?
Posted by DarthVitiosus 2 years ago
DarthVitiosus
Don't come back round here again.
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 2 years ago
MettaWorldPeace
For your second claim, that is false as well, your opponent has the same number of chances to respond to your arguments, but must offer up the first substantive argument
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 2 years ago
MettaWorldPeace
You did use that language, and when you are having a debate impuning the President's honor, you should use the most honest tactics you can, I can't wait to see your arguments about how Obama has been a 'shady' president
Posted by DarthVitiosus 2 years ago
DarthVitiosus
I don't use that language, you may. The only person being dishonest is you.Any person reading this knows that my opponent has more chances to respond to me than I do to him.
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 2 years ago
MettaWorldPeace
It is dishonest to ask your opponent to post the first argument, especially when you say I don't believe in that acceptance bs
Posted by chrisjachimiak 2 years ago
chrisjachimiak
Coercion, is the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats.
Your debate record might speak for itself on this website, but I on the other hand know how to 1. use proper grammar, 2. I'm the captain of my speech and debate team at my school, and 3. Your record may show your stats, but until you can prove that you're the "Superior debater" than I would post an argument and actually debate against me.
Posted by DarthVitiosus 2 years ago
DarthVitiosus
What coercion? My elo and debate record speaks for itself unlike yours.
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 2 years ago
MettaWorldPeace
*first
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 2 years ago
MettaWorldPeace
Does anyone else find it kind of of shady Pro don't post a 'substantive' in the first round and then coerces an argument in the second round
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
DarthVitiosuschrisjachimiakTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro due to Con's forfeiture in the finial Round. Sources also to Pro due to the fact that his source count out numbers that of Con's. Arguments to Pro as his points are not refuted fully by Con. Con drops many key arguments reguarding Obama and makes some slips that really harm him like the allowance in SOME states and other arguments also in the end harm him so I have no other option, but to give this debate to Pro. Spelling goes to Con due to a few grammatical errors that Pro has made throughout the debate and since these were more noticeable than Con's I have to give that point to Con. If you wish for me to clarify this RFD please feel free to PM me.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
DarthVitiosuschrisjachimiakTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con failed to address all of pro points and loses arguments. Pro was the only one to really use sources. The forfeit gives pro conduct.
Vote Placed by Lexus 2 years ago
Lexus
DarthVitiosuschrisjachimiakTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeiture, but con successfully refuted pro's case and illustrated that Obama does not have a shady reputation