The Instigator
Sgt4Liberty
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Reformist
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

President Obama is/was a good president (economics)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 2/18/2016 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,191 times Debate No: 86711
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (25)
Votes (0)

 

Sgt4Liberty

Con

President Obama is/was a good president (economics).

I believe he is NOT a good president Economically speaking and can prove it. I challenge "Reformist" to this debate, considering his opponent in his debate isn't putting up a fight at all. I'd like to show how the alleged data is flawed, and how Obama is actually hurting the economy.

Only rules; 48 hours argue time, 10k characters, 5 rounds, source your data if providing charts/data.

May the best Debater win!
Debate Round No. 1
Sgt4Liberty

Con

I'm going to start off with the same four topics you had in your previous debate to keep it simple.

1. The Deficit

Obama is bragging about him reducing the deficit each year in office. The charts typically shown are a measurement against GDP, but I'll show you later how the GDP is purposely being manipulated to give us artificial numbers.

First lets focus on the numbers. While Bush was in office, his HIGHEST deficit was $458 Billion, meanwhile Obama's LOWEST deficit thus far has been $483 Billion!!! How can this be, the chart shows it dropping from Bush right? Well that's a measurement against GDP, and the economy took a huge crash at the end of Bush's terms (thanks to Clinton), so the GDP to deficit ratio jumped dramatically.

Lets share those numbers once more:

Bush HIGHEST deficit = $458 Billion
Obama LOWEST deficit = $483 Billion

Is this something Obama can really brag about???

2. Unemployment

Thanks to Obamacare, many employers have now had to cut employees hours below 30 hours to avoid giving them healthcare. With cutting employees down to part time, now employers need to hire more part time workers to get the job done. This effectively has also helped Obama in terms of making the unemployment rate go down, because now employers have to hire (2) part time employees to do the job of (1) full time employee. With so many people working part time, people have to get 2-3 part time jobs to pay the bills. These people much rather have (1) full time job and not 2-3 part time jobs to make ends meet.

Another factor helping Obama's Unemployment rate drop is the fact that people who have given up on finding a job in the work place, no longer on unemployment (exhausted their benefits), are NO LONGER COUNTED!!! What?? Seriously, they are no longer factored into the Unemployment rate. (shouldn't this be considered cheating Obama?) Well, how can they track unemployment of people not getting government benefits?

3. Job Creation/Growth

To piggy back on the last item, because of Obamacare, people have to get 2 and 3 "PART TIME JOBS" to make up for employers cutting back hours to avoid paying health care.

Another problem is the jobs being created. We're continuously shipping manufacturing jobs overseas, and creating service sector jobs here. So let me get this straight, we're going to ship in upwards of 1.4 MILLION manufacturing jobs overseas, and instead we get 1.4 MILLION server, waitress, & bartender jobs (probably most of them part time)? That's not a sign of a strong economy. That's a sign of people just trying to make ends meet, and pay the bills.

4. Oil Production

Obama is simply enjoying the benefits of something that he cannot take credit for whatsoever. With new technologies in fracking, has allowed us to be able to find and tap into oil reserves that we haven't been able to in the past. If anything, Obama could have taken credit if he didn't stop actions such as the Keystone Pipeline.

5. National Debt

I'm adding this topic as it is very important to the roles of the economy under Obama. Well, the national debt was around what, $7 trillion under Bush? Something like that I think. It's now almost $20 TRILLION!!! Obama has added more to the National Debt than every single President in HISTORY, COMBINED!!!!!! Thanks to this, 23 countries in 2015 have stopped accepting the U.S. dollar, and some countries have actually made it illegal to use the U.S. dollar!! This is not the sign of a strong economy. More countries are adding to their gold reserve and using alternative currencies in lieu of the U.S. dollar. Thanks for hurting the U.S. economy Obama. Experts predict we will see a Recession much much worse than what we witnessed at the end of Bush's term. I pray they're not right, but I highly doubt it.

http://www.theblaze.com...

http://www.forbes.com...

http://www.gallup.com...

http://schiffgold.com...

http://money.cnn.com...

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

http://www.truthandaction.org...

http://www.thestreet.com...
Reformist

Pro

Thank you Con for the debate. Remeber we are looking at the U.S economy and not the factors or global macro economics



Before we look at the economic success of President Obama we have to look at the failure he inherited from Bush



As we can see President Bush took a 200 billion surplus from President Clinton and turned it into a MASSIVE deficit.



Unemployment under Bush took a similar story with the spiking of unemployement to almost 8 percent.


Now that weve understood the terrible economic desicions of President Bush lets look at the economic descions President Obama has made

1. The Deficit



A common republican arguement is that obama is a big spender however this is the opposite from the truth. As we can see Bush spiked the deficit with the Iraq war costing americans billions. However thanks to Obama's economic leadership we saw a steady decrease in the deficit which decreased almost every year.

2. Unemployment



This graph shows from the time period of Feb 09 to Feb 13. Now Barrack Obama has almost led us down to a 4.5 unemployment rate as of January 2016 (1). Thanks Obama.

3. Job Creation/Growth



Job growth under Obama has been incredible. Not a single study shows that Obama has been negative in his job growth since the 2009. He had some negative growth before 2009 because he was still cleaning up the mess of Bush. President Barrack Obama has created over 15 million jobs since his time as president (2)

4. Oil Production



Oil Production is a really clear indicator of america's economy. It makes up for a large amount of America's exports. As we can see President Bush is declining sharply when it comes to oil production however when president Obama takes over we take a great lead in our oil production.

Rebuttals:

The Deficit

My opponent fails to understand that the deficit percentage was cut significantly under Obama. My opponent fails to understand how the deficit works. While the deficit per GDP increased the defict percent per GDP has been cut big time.(3). If a republican was in office then the deficit and the deficit percentage would increase enourmously. This will also apply to the debt.

Unemployment

The unemployment rate is still the lowest in 5 years. The 10 percent unemplyoment rate of the Bush years were far worse than the years under obama. Not only this but Obama has created over 15 million jobs for americans disproving your point that somehow americans arent working (2).

Job Creation

Again Obama has created 15 MILLION jobs. Not 1.4 million. All of those jobs cannot somehow be waitressing jobs. Not only that but more jobs, regardless of what they are, contribute to the economy

Oil Production

My opponent explains that Obama is merely enjoying the fruits of someone elses labor. However Con cannot explain the downward spiral of oil under Bush and how immediatley when Obama took office oil production increase. My opponent also mislead the voters by saying Obama is riding off fracking. Hydraulic fracking was invented in 1947 (4).

National Debt




Again my opponent fails to understand the big picture. When Bush was in office the debt increase and the debt percent per GDP also increased. However under obama while the debt did increase the debt percent flattened. If a republican was in office then both wouldve increased tremendously (5).

Back to you Con!

If you have any trouble reading a graph feel free to visit my pictures to see them in more detail
(
http://www.debate.org......)
Sources:

http://www.energytrendsinsider.com......
http://biggerfatterpolitics.blogspot.com......
http://www.franken.senate.gov......
http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.com......
http://aattp.org......
http://www.msnbc.com......

Sources:

(1):
http://www.tradingeconomics.com......
(2): https://ourfuture.org......
(3):http://www.businessinsider.com...
(4):https://en.wikipedia.org...
(5):http://www.city-data.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Sgt4Liberty

Con

Thank you Pro for taking the challenge. I thought we were sticking to Obama's actions and not looking at previous presidents actions. Since you mentioned how the economy was under Bush, I'm now forced to point out how the crash (both of them) were a result from actions under Clinton (NOT Bush). Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Bush, but he took the blame from policies of a previous president.

Considering Bush was handed the dot com bubble from the day he took office (NASDAQ down 40% the day to took office), he was in a losing battle from the beginning. But lets focus on what Clinton did that resulted in the housing bubble during Bush's term. First Clinton signed Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation. He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. These actions and bills are what led to the exotic investments such as CDO's (collateralize debt obligations) and MBS (mortgage backed securities) which were sold off on Wall street to investors throughout the world. Once the interest rates changed (during the Bush era quite ironically), people could no longer afford to pay their mortgages, which resulted in defaults. Defaults led to millions of mortgages not being paid, and investors selling off these exotic investments, and crashing stocks. I won't even get into the legislation that Clinton passed in the early 90's that led to this failure in the housing bubble in 2008 either, but I'll post a link for reference.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
http://www.wsj.com...

The Deficit

My opponent states that I fail to understand that the deficit percentage was cut significantly under Obama, but he my opponent doesn't understand how it works. First, it's a percentage based on the GDP. So we have to first understand how the GDP is being manipulated to understand how the deficit percentage works. I'll just talk about one aspect that affects the GDP that most people don't know/understand. The government now includes the productivity of technology. Okay, most may agree or not question that technology might make us more productive but lets look at this one simple example. You buy your employees new computers that are 5 times faster. Well, according to the BLS (Bureau of Labor & Statistics) seems to think that those employees are now 5 times more productive because of this technology and therefore calculates this into the GDP. You see, you cannot type 5 times faster, or work 5 times faster, process orders 5 times faster, complete and article 5 times faster, answer emails 5 times faster. You do these things slightly faster, but the GDP EXTREMELY OVER EXAGGERATES this, which makes the government look good (far better than it ever should).
In regards to the deficit, let me repeat this again since my opponent is failing to address the numbers.

Obama's LOWEST deficit = $483 billion
Bush's HIGHEST deficit = $458 Billion

I'm not a genius, but I know that $483 is much higher than $458. So Obama didn't reduce the deficit that was handed to him from Bush, but just reduced his own wastefulness. Let's look at it this way, if you go out and spend $10k more than you earned last year (racking up credit card debt), then for the next 8 years, you only spend ($9k, then $8k, then $7k, then $6k, etc) reducing the amount that you spend ABOVE your income, should you get praised for that? What this means is that your debt is continually rising ($10k + 9k= $19k + 8k = $27k +7k = $34k + $6k = $40k, etc.). Should you be praised as a savior for racking up debt? Let me know if this math is too simple for you.

https://mises.org...

Unemployment

Ok, so the unemployement is the lowest in 5 years. Let me ask you this: "Would you rather have 3 part time jobs that make only minimum wage? Or would you rather have 1 full time job making $25 an hour with health benefits?" So far you appear to be in favor of 3 part time jobs making minimum wage, because that's how Obama's unemployment rates are down so much.

Also, my opponent fails to address the fact that people who are no longer getting unemployment drop out of the unemployment numbers. So if Obama didn't gain a single job in a month, and 30,000 people dropped out of the unemployment statistics, then his Unemployment rate drops in percentage, even though NO NEW JOBS were created.

Job Creation

I'm sorry, 15 MILLION new jobs were created apparently under Obama. I'm sure 14 Million of those are part time bartender/waitress jobs, since people have to work 3 jobs to make what they used to make at 1 job.
Another thing that Obama has benefited from is the boom in Oil, which isn't a result of his policies, but an increase in oil prices making fracking now a viable and profitable business. If anything, Obama has been hindering the oil business with the rejection of the Keystone Pipeline and a crack down on EPA regulations.

Oil Production

My opponent points out that Hydraulic fracking was invented in 1947 (well it can actually be tracked to much farther back than that), but what caused the recent boom in oil fracking? What enabled the oil and gas industry to extract oil from shale rock over the past 7 years was higher prices. If it weren"t for higher oil prices, the capital investment needed in the oil and gas sector, wouldn"t have occurred, and US oil production would have continued to decline. If it costs more to drill than the oil is worth, then people aren't going to drill. Same thing in GOLD mining, it wasn't done for years, until gold got high enough in price. (Simple economics kid).

NOW LOOK WHAT OBAMA DID TO OIL!!!????? Obama has conspired with Saudi Arabia to crash the price of Oil to hurt Russia, since Russia made the largest energy deal in the history of the world with China, circumventing the Petro-Dollar. That's why we went into Iraq, embargoes on Cuba, cut off North Korea, sanctioned Russia, Iran, bombed Syria and others. He's a puppet for the Federal Reserve, and his first priority is to protect the banking cartels position and their profits from the Petro Dollar. But at what cost? Now millions are going to lose jobs in the Oil fracking business because oil is bottoming out? Good try, but Obama has done nothing to help oil production, and has done everything to hurt it.

http://www.forbes.com...
http://www.nationalreview.com...
http://oilprice.com...
http://www.globalresearch.ca...

National Debt

My opponent says I fail to see the big picture?? WTF? Do you not have a clue on how the debt works?

It's really simple math that my 5 year old son can even grasp. 1+1=2, right? Now add about 12 zeros behind it and you have the same exact concept.

So, what say you about Obama adding more to the National Debt than every single President in the History of the United States of America (COMBINED)?

Back to you Pro!
Reformist

Pro

Thank you Con for your arguement. I do not want to get too off topic but the Clinton years saw a massive increase in jobs and a surplus of money. The Bush years tore all this down and left the mess for Obama to clean up. For more reference look at the Clinton deficit into Bush deficit graph from the previous round.

1.Deficit

My opponent takes to blaming the Bureau of Labor instead of looking at the facts. At the end of the fiscal year of 2012 the deficit was 1.1 trillion. You may say thats a large number but Obama has actually cut 312 billion dollars from the deficit his first term and 200 billion dollars from 2012 (1).

Not only this but Obama's spending is very small compared to the other presidents that came before him



Compared to the 4 presidents that came before him President Obama has had the slowest spending in decades! (1)

Unfortuantley my opponent still doesnt understand how the deficit functions. Once the deficit starts rising you cant stop it from rising.



Even though the numbers are increasing the percentage of spending contributing to the deficit is shrinking.

2. Unemployment

My opponent asks a question. "Would you rather have 3 part time jobs than one full time job?". Well lets say thats true. Obama has created 15 million jobs so if even if what my opponent said was true 15 mil divided by 3 is 5 million. So my opponent concedes that at least 5 million new jobs were created for the economy. And this is true according to my opponeents own scenario! 5 million jobs created for the economy is a sign of a good presidency


3. Job creation

Again my opponent uses assumption to justify his narrative. He did not refute the 15 million job created and his awkward refutation involved an assumption that almost all of Obama's new jobs were part time jobs for which he did not include a source.

4. Oil production

My opponent concedes that obama is taking credit for fracking since fracking has been in use in the USA for more than 60 years. Now under Obama oil production has boomed. Crude oil production has been up 72 percent and we have passed saudi arabia in oil production. (2)

This is a symbol of an economic mastermind since oil production has been on a steady decrease with Bush and Clinton.



As we can see after Obama took office the oil production of the US increased tremendously.


5. National Debt

My opponent has come to insulting my understanding of the debt without any understanding himself. He of course resorts to using a simple minded narrative when it comes to the national debt. Just because the numbers are increasing does not mean the percent is increasing as well. As i stated, even with a graph, obama has cut federal spending. The amount of the debt increases because you cant simply cut all spending. However Obama has cut the percent and has used cautionary spending.

I will show the graph again so that you will finally understand it



Again back to you Con

Sources:
(1):http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
(2):http://money.cnn.com...

Debate Round No. 3
Sgt4Liberty

Con

Thank you Pro. You're right, we shouldn't get too off topic on how Clinton is the real cause of the housing bubble, dot com bubble and other legislation that led to the collapse. Bush was bad too with (TARP), which Obama voted for as a Senator by the way, but lets focus on Obama' s actions as a President.

1) Deficit

Obama played with the math. He didn't measure "half" by the last full fiscal-year deficit under President Bush, a record $438 billion in Fiscal 2008. He proposed to cut it in half from its all-time high under the Troubled Assets Relief Program — which he voted for in the Senate.

He still blew it.

Under Obama, the deficits set records, from $1.4 trillion in Fiscal 2009, to $1.3 trillion in Fiscal 2010 and Fiscal 2011, to $1.1 trillion in Fiscal 2012. Three years after his pledge, Obama told an Atlanta TV station, "Well, we're not there because this recession turned out to be a lot deeper than any of us realized."

I don't know where you get these silly charts but the numbers don't lie.

Last year Bush in office = $438 Billion Deficit
First year Obama in office = $1.4 TRILLION Deficit

So, yes Obama has brought it down each year, but it's still way more than Bush. I don't see how we can give him praise for running this deficit, or having a deficit at all. The fact is, he TRIPLED THE DEFICIT, and each year since has reduced it slightly, and he wants to be congratulated for that? Seriously??
I got charts too son.



http://www.cnsnews.com...
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com...

2) Unemployment

Mr. Obama’s claim of a robust jobless rate takes no account of the record 92.9 million Americans no longer in the labor force. The labor participation rate was 62.7 percent in December, a 38-year low that recalled the “economic malaise” of the Carter presidency. Of course the Unemployment rate is going to drop, when the workforce labor participation drops off at these rates! Time to take you back to math class!!


http://www.washingtontimes.com...

3) Job Creation

Again, many of the new jobs created here in the U.S. are low wage, part time jobs and are the least desirable among the American People. Maybe we shall focus on NET new jobs. Meaning, new jobs versus the jobs lost. Think about it, if Obama gained 15 million jobs, but lost 20 million, wouldn't that be a very bad thing? You can focus on one, without looking at the other. Looking at the chart, I sure don't see anything impressive in terms of NET new jobs from Obama.


http://www.forbes.com...
http://www.newsmax.com...


4. Oil Production

What my opponent fails to realize is that chart includes oil production on PRIVATE LAND! That's right, Obama is taking credit for oil production that is taking place whether or not he's president. Instead lets focus on oil production that happened on FEDERAL LAND which requires obtaining permits and licenses from the federal government. Yup, looks likes its down under Obama because his harsh EPA regulations has made it quite difficult to obtain these permits to drill. Therefore, he CANNOT take any credit here either. Also is a chart of offshore oil production as well.





http://www.factcheck.org...
http://freebeacon.com...

5. National Debt

Ok, like my drill instructor always told me "let me break it down Barney style". Here's a picture for you to make it a little more simple.






http://www.theprogressivesinfluence.com...
https://lexingtonlibertarian.wordpress.com...


Back to you Pro



Reformist

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent

1. The Deficit

Again, my opponent is looking at straight numbers themselves. This can often mislead the public because the number is increasing. However the percent is not. Not to say my opponents graph is outright wrong its just looking at numbers and not the percent



This graph is looking at things from a better viewpoint. As we see the percent of addition to the deficit is shrinking rapidly under Obama. Of course the deficit itself will increase but the percent is decreasing (1). My opponent is using larger numbers to mislead the voters. Just because the deficit is rising doesnt mean Obama is a bad economics president. We need to look at the actual facts and the facts are that Obama has been cutting spending and spending for smart reasons.

2. Unemployment/Correlation is not Causation

According to my opponent because Obama happens to be president during low labor participation rate. However his own graphs tells the story. Because Obama was even in office we had one of the worst recessions in American history. The amount of space the recession takes up on the graph is larger than any of the previous recessions not to metntion that after 2000 (George Bush) the civic labor participation was also drastically going down. My opponent is not taking the other factors that are decreasing the labor participation rate and is just blaming it all on Obama. Nothing about the Wall Street Crash and the Reccession. Its all Obama's fault to my opponent

According to Fact Check.org unemployment has taken a drastic decrease to 5.6 percent (2).

3. Job Creation



My opponent and i are having different conclusions on job creation and this is why. Private Sector jobs, meaning not government jobs, increased six fold under Obama than under Bush (3). However public sector jobs plummeted but this isnt a factor on the economy. Whether the government loses jobs is irrevelant, its whether americans outside the government lose or gain jobs is what is important. Like my opponent states mulitple time the government should be small. Well under Obama it has. Its lost more jobs under Obama than Bush. However jobs that common joe people work have increase by the millions.

4. Oil Production

Again my opponent looks at the government for economic indicators when thats not the case. USA is a capitalist nation. Looking at the losses or gains of the government is not going to give you anything unless that nation is a socialist nation. Of course President Obama has not given many leases. He is an enviornmentalist, however Oil production has gone up by a large amount resulting in one of the best economies america has ever seen.

5. The Debt

My Opponent is, again, looking at the numbers instead of the percent increase. As ive explained about 3 times the amount of the debt has indeed increased. However federal spending has been flattened under Obama (4). If there was a republican president the amount of debt would increase AND the percent would increase



I would like to thank my opponent for this debate


Sources:
(1): https://www.whitehouse.gov...
(2): http://www.factcheck.org...
(3): http://www.dailykos.com...
(4): http://www.dailykos.com...
Debate Round No. 4
Sgt4Liberty

Con

Thank you for the response Pro!

Well, I don't want to beat a dead horse so I'll briefly rebuttal followed by my conclusion.

1) The Deficit
I've clearly shown the hard numbers and despite the misleading (percentages), Obama clearly had triple the deficit the first year he was in office compared to Bush' last year in office. So, to say he in dropping the percentage is true, but it doesn't mention that he's the one who tripled it first year in office.
2) Unemployment
I've covered the scam played by the BLS in calculating the unemployment rate. It's easy to see that having the lowest participation in decades drastically helps the unemployment numbers, therefore Obama can't brag about that either.
3) Job Creation
After looking at overall net job growth, I've clearly pointed out how Obama has the worst record of every president since the great depression.
4) Oil Production
Looking at the facts, we can see that Obama had NOTHING to do with the increase in oil production. If anything, he's further hindered the growth with the stopping of the keystone pipeline and other EPA crack downs.
5) The Debt
Do I even need to prove anything here? This is public knowledge and fact that his policies have drastically increased the debt.

Let me conclude with some policies of President Obama that has further put this economy in danger. Obama signed FACTA into law. If you don't know anything about FACTA, it makes us the ONLY country in the WORLD that tracks down U.S. citizens and taxes them even if they don't live or earn money in the U.S. This has encouraged 23 or more countries to ban the use of U.S. dollars and in fact some countries have made it a crime to use our dollars!!! This shows that we have a WEAK dollar, and nobody wants to deal with our dollars. That's the whole reason we sanction Russia, bomb Iraq, bomb Syria, try to bomb Iran, sanction North Korea, embargo Cuba, etc. They don't deal in U.S. dollar, which results in less demand, weakening our dollar.

To top off the cake, China has been cashing in U.S. Treasury bonds and buying up gold at an alarming rate. This is NOT GOOD for us. Obama's deficit spending, raising debt, and erroneous legislation have further DOOMED our ECONOMY!

Thanks for the debate Pro! It was fun.

http://www.thenewamerican.com...
http://www.heritage.org...
http://money.cnn.com...
http://www.bloomberg.com...;

Reformist

Pro

Since this is the last round i will counter rebutt my opponent.

1. The Deficit

I know youve shown the hard numbers. The hard numbers arent the real indicator. The government always has to spend. Its how much they spend which is the problem. According to Politfact they have rated that the Presidents statement of "We have cut the defict by over half" to be a true statement (1). To say anything else is just untrue. My opponenets statements are biased in the fact that they are just looking at the hard numbers and not the percentages.

So to conclude on the deficit, President Obama has cut deficit spending by over half.

2. Unemployment

My opponent again states his talking point about the lowest participation rate in US history. He doesnt even rebutt my point that we just had one of the worst recessions in US history (2). Because of the Wall Street crash and one of the worst recessions since the great depression it really isnt a surprise people are out of jobs.

Again my opponent doesnt rebutt this, he ignores it

3. Job Creation

AGAIN my opponenet does not rebutt my point that private sector jobs have increase 6 times more than when Bush was in office. He also doesnt rebutt the fact that loss of government jobs isnt a big indicator of the economy and that growth in the private sector is more important than growth in the public sector to the economy (3).

4. Oil Production

We are judging the state of America under Obama's reign. We again have seen more oil production than any of the recent presidents (Clinton and Bush) (4). Some projects such as the Keystone Pipeline could have created another BP oil spill crisis which could have taken billions or possibly TRILLIONS of dollars to clean up.

5. The Debt

My opponent has not even talked about this extensivley last round so i will not either. However i will state that Obama has cut spending which has produced a smaller debt than a debt under a republican President

I will not address my opponents views on Facta or China because that was not the original 5 topics we agreed to discuss.


And finally because my opponent seems to have taken a liking to post funny pictures of Obama i will too :D



Sources:
(1): http://www.politifact.com...
(2): http://www.ifii.com...
(3): http://www.economicshelp.org...
(4): http://money.cnn.com...

Debate Round No. 5
25 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
Ew 5 rounds
Posted by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
Added to my voting list
Posted by 16kadams 1 year ago
16kadams
I think Pro won doe, too lazy to vote right now because fat
Posted by 16kadams 1 year ago
16kadams
So many misleading statistics on both sides. Ah, political divisiveness. Even I sometimes fall for the dumb statistic for political reasons temporarily.
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
SGT for liberty offers minimal/poor support for all of his claims on job creation.

You should both note that supply side economics and deregulation of wall street began with Regan and carried through until the end of Bush the 2nd. Both parties are complicit. That said the GOP did more so on a 2/5 ratio for anyone that is actually keeping score.

The reality is that Obama inherited the big mess created by twenty eight years of financial mismanagement.

In the comments Sgt played the tired song about constitutionality and "innocent lives, without stating what specific transgressions. That dog don't hunt!
Posted by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
Pro should enlarge his pictures by increasing the font size while highlighting the picture, or simply upload a larger version of the picture
Posted by Reformist 1 year ago
Reformist
Round 5 is just conclusion no new arguement or rebuttals right?
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
Sgt, are you speaking about drone strikes when you mention
innocent lives?

What constitutional violations do you accuse Obama of..?

What is your familiarity with pre WW2 American foreign policy
compared to 1945 through today? Ever-increasing western hegemony
is not the providence of one party or the other. Both have been willing
participants. Do you propose changing that pattern?
Posted by Reformist 1 year ago
Reformist
Just goong to say this. I do not like the constitution
Posted by Sgt4Liberty 1 year ago
Sgt4Liberty
@davidmancke Really? Why's that? How many innocent women and children died as a result of their foreign policy? How many trillions did they run up the National Debt? How many laws in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution did they write? Not saying they didn't, I just think Obama's got an impressive record to beat at being the worst President ever.
No votes have been placed for this debate.