The Instigator
jlma_ad
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
Ragnar_Rahl
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points

Race is the driving factor for Hispanics voting for people other than Barack Obama.

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/22/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,109 times Debate No: 2866
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

jlma_ad

Con

I keep reading what are to me surprising pieces about non-black minorities and their supposed issues with voting for Barack Obama because of his race. Lines such as "There's always been tension in the black and Latino communities." (http://www.nytimes.com...) and "Lets face it, Hispanics will vote for a woman president before voting for someone who is African-American." (http://abclocal.go.com...) keep showing up in articles. You even hear about the Asian racism (http://www.time.com...).

The percentages have shown some difficulty on Obama's part winning these minority groups over. I contend that Hispanics are not racist, but just do not like Obama's record on the issues. Obama voted against CAFTA. He also co-sponsored a bill to cap the number of legal immigrants allowed into the country at 200,000 - a 66% reduction. Why is it so hard to believe that Hispanics simply like Hillary Clinton or a Republican candidate (in open primaries) better?
Ragnar_Rahl

Pro

Just for fun, I'm going to illustrate the dangers of a poorly worded resolution.

Hispanic gangs that are racist against blacks exist and recruit thousands of members.

It is highly unlikely that at least two members out of those thousands are not registered voters who voted for obama because of his race.

It is even more unlikely that there are not at least two hispanic people somewhere in the united states who had racially motivated votes against Obama.

The resolution does not require that a majority or a significant number of hispanics are motivated so, only that the number of those who do so is plural.

Are you telling me that out of the millions of people in this country, no two have the following characteristics: are hispanic, voted for people other than barack obama, and voted in a racially motivated manner?
Debate Round No. 1
jlma_ad

Con

The resolution would in fact be worded incorrectly had the resolution been "Race is the driving factor for hispanics voting for people other than Barack Obama."

Hispanics is stated with a capital H in the resolution though, indicating that we are not speaking of 2 or more hispanics, but rather an entire ethnic group. I agree that some people who are hispanic were racially motivated in voting for someone other than Barack Obama. You have not shown that race is a driving factor for the group as a whole though.
Ragnar_Rahl

Pro

"
The resolution would in fact be worded incorrectly had the resolution been "Race is the driving factor for hispanics voting for people other than Barack Obama."

Hispanics is stated with a capital H in the resolution though, indicating that we are not speaking of 2 or more hispanics, but rather an entire ethnic group. I agree that some people who are hispanic were racially motivated in voting for someone other than Barack Obama. You have not shown that race is a driving factor for the group as a whole though.
"

Capitalization does not in fact make any such indication, and I challenge you to find a grammar source that specifically states such. Otherwise how could you possibly speak of "two or more" Bloods? "bloods" would be incorrect because then they wouldn't be the gang.

According to one source I have (http://darkwing.uoregon.edu...), the use of capitalization in Hispanic is obligatory in all cases, not a matter of any semantics of quantity (which would mean we have now both spoken incorrectly in our arguments, for which I apologize).

I did not in any case argue that your resolution was worded "incorrectly," only poorly (e.g. it's good grammar but lends bad meaning). The way to fix it would be an "all" qualifier. Without the all qualifier, all indications are that the meaning of the words in this resolution is that two or more hispanics have voted against Barack due to his race, which means all indications are you have essentially conceded that the pro position on the resolution as actually stated is correct.
Debate Round No. 2
jlma_ad

Con

"Capitalization does not in fact make any such indication, and I challenge you to find a grammar source that specifically states such."

- Your own source states that you use a capital letter for 'The names of racial, linguistic, tribal, religious, and other groups of people are capitalized.'

"According to one source I have (http://darkwing.uoregon.edu......), the use of capitalization in Hispanic is obligatory in all cases."

- Where does it say this?

"Without the all qualifier, all indications are that the meaning of the words in this resolution is that two or more hispanics have voted against Barack due to his race."

- "ALL" indications? Except for your own source which indicates it.
Ragnar_Rahl

Pro

"- Your own source states that you use a capital letter for 'The names of racial, linguistic, tribal, religious, and other groups of people are capitalized.'"

Yes, the names of the groups, e.g. the same with the groups members. A group's name does not imply the total group out of necessity, as you would see if you hadn't ignored the "how do you say two or more Bloods" objection.

"
- Where does it say this? "

Precisely where you quoted. It said they are capitalized, it gave no exceptions. The fact that Hispanic is the name of a racial group does not mean that all uses of the term refer to the WHOLE linguistic group, only some part of it."

- "ALL" indications? Except for your own source which indicates it."
You seem to have misinterpreted my source- which as the only indication is indeed all indications.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
erm replace linguistic with racial sorry. :D
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by lorca 8 years ago
lorca
jlma_adRagnar_RahlTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
jlma_adRagnar_RahlTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by zakkuchan 9 years ago
zakkuchan
jlma_adRagnar_RahlTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by jlma_ad 9 years ago
jlma_ad
jlma_adRagnar_RahlTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
jlma_adRagnar_RahlTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03