The Instigator
interrogator
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Dakota-Hiltzman
Con (against)
Winning
46 Points

President Obama will be reelected as President, like it or not

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 7 votes the winner is...
Dakota-Hiltzman
Started: 2/9/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,899 times Debate No: 14727
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (7)

 

interrogator

Pro

He will be reelected based on his intellectual capacity and ability to govern. And this is the primary reason
why the Republicans will fail to defeat him. Do you agree ?
Dakota-Hiltzman

Con

I thank my opponent for this topic.
he asks the question, "President Obama will be reelected as President, like it or not"
My answer, no like.

My opponent never claims it, so I reserve the power of fiat. if neither side can prove their stance the Con wins. If the Con proves their side, the Con wins. the only way the Pro can win is if he proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that Obama will win the 2012 presidential election

So moving onto the Pro's statements
He will be reelected based on his intellectual capacity and ability to govern. And this is the primary reason
why the Republicans will fail to defeat him. Do you agree?

+First of all I would like to point out my opponent is making a statement of fact one a projectionist topic. he cannot know something that has yet to happen
+Second he claims Obama will be re-elected based on intellect and leadership ability, yet both aforementioned Qualities about Obama have been constantly and critically attacked. with such claims as his speeches have no substance to them Obama will certainly not be re-elected for this point if anything
http://www.nypost.com...
http://www.facebook.com...
http://topics.npr.org...

therefore I urge a Con vote.
Debate Round No. 1
interrogator

Pro

That was interesting my friend. But I am not impressed. You base your information too much by statistics
that are every changing and highly flawed. Let me start by saying this. You had no idea like the rest of us,
that he would win. Mainly because he was a Black Man here in America. Number two, he won a few Southern
states that have been totally red prior to the 2008 elections. With a Republican congress in power the odds were
stacked against him. But the power hungry, war mongering Republicans caused their own demise. The became greedy
and abandoned every ounce of their dignity among other things.
There are many underlying issues that the other side is unaware of and their influence on the world at large
is fleeting. With most Americans having Conservative views, they will not vote for the person they deem the
weakest. Obama is a great campaigner and debater. This is the Republicans weak point and they usually
are not better than the Dems when it comes to economics. With the slight but growing economy, he will gain
momentum with the independents and keep his jaded but highly loyal Liberal base. In turn they will again
outnumber and outman the GOP. What do you have to say about that ? Oh there is more. Lets roll.........
Dakota-Hiltzman

Con

I thank my opponent for his response

Pro-
In regards to lines 1-7
+ I'm not a republican, I'm a conservative.
+ my opponent does not attack, or even cover my evidence.
+ His logic here is based purely on his own opinion.

Ignore this Logic;

In regards to lines 8-13
+ My opponent makes little to no sense here.
+ My opponent is not debating the resolution here

In regards to Line 18, "What do you have to say about that ? Oh there is more. Lets roll........."
+I say, congratulations you have not only done nothing in the realm of this debate, but you seem t have emulated you hero Obama with you speech, no substance.

So in conclusion, my opponent has yet to cover the Con points, and has given you no reason to believe that Obama will be re-elected. Vote Con
Debate Round No. 2
interrogator

Pro

Wrong again Dakota. This is based on facts. The projection shows that Obama still has a strong following with
the Blacks, and Hispanics. He is still loved with about half of the independents. And if he gives a valid case
with his Conservative couterpart, he will win over few Republicans as well. The numbers are there.
The Dems have spent more money on their campaign ads and other promotions. The unemployment numbers
are on the decrease, yes this is true. He has created more jobs than George Bush jr thus far and in a short
period of time. The Repblican congress will give him a boost just in time for the 2012 elections, just like they did
Clinton. The troops will pull out and the money will start coming in as the small business industries remain fair. The deficit will remain stagnant, but the auto world has seen noticeable progress. This is a
big deal and consumer confidence has also risen, and is still on the rise. That is a fact. Come on man. You need to give me some
legitimate answers. Forget the Repblican like rhetoric. You are losing here. Badly. What do you have to
say ?
Dakota-Hiltzman

Con

The Con has won for the following two reasons

1. My opponent gives absolutely no proof on any of his arguments.
My opponent makes many baseless claims through the course of this round. he says Obama will be re-elected for one, but proves it not.
In fact look at my opponent's last speech it is all Evidence based claims, to which he provides no evidence whatsoever

2. The pro stance was never even attacked by Con
Review the debate, never once does my opponent touch the claims I've made. I cannot lose.

I thank my opponent for this debate, and I severely suggest he further research the idea of Claim/Warrant/ and Impact before making such bold claims.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Cyrus75 3 years ago
Cyrus75
Dakota-Hiltzman made very very good points while this libral so called 'interrogater' made some wishes
Posted by resolutionsmasher 3 years ago
resolutionsmasher
yeah, that's a faster decline in approval than George W. Bush so you kinda proved it otherwise

i.e.
he was elected and was at 70-75 percent approval during inauguration. just three years later he hits 45-50 percent approval. that rate puts him at 37-42 percent next year. so yeah, his chances are looking awesome (sarcasm). Maybe he shouldn't make friends with the enemies of America, that migh help
Posted by boredinclass 3 years ago
boredinclass
How bout he'll win because he has a 50% popularity and a 42% job approval
Posted by dinokiller 3 years ago
dinokiller
Bring it on interrogator, if you keep making baseless arguments without proof, we will take you down.
Posted by Dakota-Hiltzman 3 years ago
Dakota-Hiltzman
I accepted and made my first speech.
(waiting patiently)
Posted by interrogator 3 years ago
interrogator
Well is there anyone out there who wants to debate me on this. I promise you will lose.
President Obama will be relected and will win hands down. If you do not agree, then
make yourself known now. (waiting patiently)
Posted by vardas0antras 3 years ago
vardas0antras
Nope :D
Posted by Dakota-Hiltzman 3 years ago
Dakota-Hiltzman
No, I do not agree
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Punch 3 years ago
Punch
interrogatorDakota-HiltzmanTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: The whole debate is questionable. My experience is that predictions about the future are notoriously unreliable. It is true that Obama will either be reelected President or he will not. No one could say with 100 certainty that he will. Since Con doesn't have to prove that he won't in order to win the debate, then in my opinion Con wins.
Vote Placed by BradyM 3 years ago
BradyM
interrogatorDakota-HiltzmanTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Aaronroy 3 years ago
Aaronroy
interrogatorDakota-HiltzmanTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
interrogatorDakota-HiltzmanTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro doesn't prove the resolution "beyond the shadow of a doubt," only by a preponderance of evidence. Pro didn't do that. Pro would have to argue from statistics and polls, citing historical patterns. Pro offed mainly his opinion, and weak statistics. The next election remains unpredictable, as Con argues. Pro's personal attacks lose conduct.
Vote Placed by Sojourner 3 years ago
Sojourner
interrogatorDakota-HiltzmanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Cobo 3 years ago
Cobo
interrogatorDakota-HiltzmanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
interrogatorDakota-HiltzmanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: I found PRO to be more ranting and attacking of CON's person, rather then address anything of the actual debate. He also had rather poor grammar and spelling, as if he quickly typed up his arguments, and did not proof read them. While I don't like that PRO argued that it is not possible to know the future (I feel that it is clear what PRO was arguing about, and CON should have done that), I feel that PRO's direct attacks outweigh the semantics (thus giving CON the conduct point).
Research this debate: United States,Mitt Romney,Barack Obama