The Instigator
Crypto247
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ore_Ele
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Ron Paul should be president

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 5 votes the winner is...
Ore_Ele
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/13/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,432 times Debate No: 18776
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (5)

 

Crypto247

Pro

I think Ron Paul should be president. I really don't agree with him much be he tells the truth. I will wait before making my point.
Ore_Ele

Con

I will make a few points as to why he should not be president, but this is mostly just an intro into the argument that I will make next round.

The president must be elected democratically (well, a weird representative democratic system, stupid EC). Ron Paul will not get the votes to win either the republican nomination, nor the general election. Without winning the election, Ron Paul should not be president.

Ron Paul has a very poor racist history [1]. Now, Ron Paul and his blind supporters will say he never wrote those. Ron Paul even said in 2008 that he had never read these. Pretty hard to believe, since they were brought to his attention back in 1996 [2], when he defended them and never said that they weren't his (you'd think that'd be a big thing to point out, of course, that was when he was running in Texas and not on a national level, so it was okay to admit racism there). Paul, several years later, came back and said that they weren't his, "he claimed that his campaign aides thought it would be "too confusing" to tell the truth, so he had to lie and accept responsibility."

The current excuse is an unknown ghostwriter for his newsletter. Is that "too confusing" or just another lie? It doesn't seem too confusing to me if it is the truth. What aid would suggest taking the hook for that rather than point out that truth? Unless, of course, this is just another lie thought up after the fact.

[1] http://articles.cnn.com...
[2] http://www.realchange.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Crypto247

Pro

Well that is not true. CNN is a liberal souce anyway. You lie. Besides even if he did say it then it must be right since he is Ron Paul. If Ron Paul says it then it must be true. The main reason why I am voting for him is just because he does not support Universal Health Care. UHC is evil and will cut doctors money by 90 percent and will make the middle class poor since they have nothing to thrive for. The current health system is great. We have the best in the world. So ha!
Ore_Ele

Con

???

Well, first I'll address the comments made about my arguments, then I'll go into my opponent's arguments.

My opponent says that CNN is a liberal source. That is an ad hominem attack on CNN. Whether they are liberal or not does not change the truth value of their claim. If the claim is false, you can prove it false. My opponent then goes on to say that even if Paul did say it, it must be true because he is Ron Paul. This is cirular logic, and therefore illogical. Paul creates a contridiction, and even admits that he lied. Therefore he cannot be telling the truth in both 1996 (when he admitted that they were his) and in 2008 (when he said that they were written by a spooky ghost writer).

Moving on to my opponent's arguments, he claims that he is voting for Paul because he is against the healthcare bill. That's is all fine and dandy, but that does nothing to seperate him out from the rest of the crowd of republicans that all oppose the healthcare bill.

So far, my opponent has not made one lasting argument as to why Paul should be president, and none of his refutations to my counter arguments have held any water.
Debate Round No. 2
Crypto247

Pro

Crypto247 forfeited this round.
Ore_Ele

Con

Ore_Ele forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
Many of you know, that I'm not online on the weekends, so it looks like I will not be able to post my last round. I encourage everyone to vote based on what has been presented R1 - the first half of R3.
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
Now you've jinxed it for sure... thanks. ;P
Posted by airmax1227 6 years ago
airmax1227
I'd hate to jinx you Ore_Ele, but this looks like it should be win #100... Congrats
Posted by Man-is-good 6 years ago
Man-is-good
"Well that is not true. CNN is a liberal souce anyway. You lie."
1. Denial without proof...
2. S&G-source
3. Excellent response, Pro. When we start claiming that others are lying, then that means they are.
Posted by TheRomanticist 6 years ago
TheRomanticist
I detect the presence of a troll.
Posted by thett3 6 years ago
thett3
"You lie."

Bullet proof rebuttal.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 6 years ago
imabench
Crypto247Ore_EleTied
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 had to tell why Ron Paul should have been president, he failed to do so
Vote Placed by wiploc 6 years ago
wiploc
Crypto247Ore_EleTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: The conduct point for the insult, "You lie." Pro's argued that Paul tells the truth was refuted. Pro's argument about universal health care was of troll-like quality, and irrelevant unless Paul is the only person (or at least only candidate) opposed to UHC. Con pointed this out. Con gets a point for Pro's poor spelling.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
Crypto247Ore_EleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Accusation of lying.
Vote Placed by Lickdafoot 6 years ago
Lickdafoot
Crypto247Ore_EleTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con showed that Ron Paul lied, and Pros point that if ron paul said it, it must be true, was properly refuted. I didn't see anything convincing about whether he should be president, but con argued better than pro.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 6 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Crypto247Ore_EleTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: No convincing arguments at all not to mention that BOTH sides forfeited their last rounds. I will leave this a tie.