The Instigator
wingnut2280
Pro (for)
Losing
29 Points
The Contender
Tatarize
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

Rudy is better than whoever you support

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
Pro Tied Con
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: 1/19/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,419 times Debate No: 1975
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (15)

 

wingnut2280

Pro

For the purposes of my sanity, can whoever accepts this please NOT pick Ron Paul. I respect your opinion and realize he is a candidate that isn't Rudy, but I have had the Ron Paul vs. Rudy debate half a dozen times. I would REALLY appreciate it.

Anyway, I think Rudy Giuliani is the best candidate for president. I am beginning to think I am the only one on this site who does, but I am sticking to my guns and willing to defend my position. I have made the debate four rounds, so please tell me your candidate of choice and why you are supporting them over Rudy. I will attempt to prove that Rudy is a better candidate. Thanks.
Tatarize

Con

John Edwards is a better candidate than Rudy Giuliani because he's sane.

Giuliani married his cousin.
Giuliani has been married three times.
Giuliani cheats on his wives.
Giuliani wears dresses.
Giuliani used the remains of 9/11 victims to fill potholes.
Giuliani built his terrorism command center in the twin towers. Critics argued that those might be the attacked and would serve as a poor base.
Giuliani failed to get firefighters' radios replaced after the 1993 attacks. This lead to the deaths of many firefighters who fell out of communication.
Giuliani betrayed the heroes of 9/11 and is now fairly universally hated by the firefighters in question.
Giuliani is running on nothing except his record of failure at 9/11.

Rudy "9/11" Giuliani would make a horrific president from his clear record of maleficence, dishonestly, outright lying, cheating, and compound fraud.

http://www.rudy-urbanlegend.com...
http://graphics8.nytimes.com...
http://www.jonesreport.com...
http://www2.washingtonmonthly.com...

In short, the man is a slimeball. When he campaigns, his numbers actually go down. To know him is to like other people.

-----------

On the other hand Edwards is sane, would reform education, health care, and most importantly get us the hell out of this stupid war.

As odd as Ron Paul is, he'd still make a better president than Rudy on just the Iraq War issue. That issue alone is more than enough any candidate a better candidate than Rudy, who like most of the Republicans wants to stay there forever...
Debate Round No. 1
wingnut2280

Pro

Most of the claims you make are simply untrue. As for the radios and command center, there will always be critics. What people don't tell you is that the democrat-controlled city council decided to go with contreversial new technology from Motorola, which didn't arrive until aftre 9-11. That was not Giuliani's fault, but since he is mayor, he takes the heat from disgruntled survivors and morners. The command center was placed in the towers because the WTC was the most apt place to house the center. There will always be critics would analyse and break-down decisions.

Giuliani has an outstanding pre-9-11 record, which qualifies him for president by itself. He reduced crime by 66%, completely turned around Times Square and the economy. He reported so many illegal aliens the bureau asked the city to stop. He is a shining example of Republican theory in action. He has the highest and best executive experience. Rudy has proven that he can turn things around. He worked miracles in NYC, despite what a few misguided survivors would have you believe.

True, Giuliani has been divorced. I don't see how this makes him crazy. He is a policy and executive genius.

Edwards is hardly a better candidate. He would overregulate the economy, bungling it into near-fascism. Every candidate has campaigned on reform, only Rudy has proved that he can do it, and on a massive scale. Edwards has proven that he has unrealistic goals. Even his own party sees him as a joke and that his policies, specifically on the war, are idealistic and impossible. He claims he would pull all troops out immediately, leaving none behind. This policy flies in the face of every military opinion we have receieved. Even if you don't like the war, Edwards is a bad candidate because of his radical and unactionable policy.

Rudy doesn't want to stay in Iraq forever, but he realizes that a secure Iraq is in our best interest and that leaving would be unwise. He realizes the dissnetiment for the war, but also the current necessity for it. I'm not arguing that Ron Paul is a joke, just stated that I would prefer not to debate about him again.

Rudy is better than John Edwards because of the practical and actionable nature of his policy. Even if you disagree with the war, Giuliani has the experience and policy that can be put to work. Edwards has nothing but rhetoric, which even his party sees as ludicruous and unaccomplisable.
Tatarize

Con

The radios were replaced after 1993 after Giuliani gave a no-bid contract to Motorola (the city council doesn't give out contracts) for 14 million dollars (initially it was going to be 1.4 million but the price jumped after the no-bid contract went through). The radios were never field tested and were recalled after a firefighters' radio distress call went unheard. Giuliani gave them back the same faulty radio they had from before. The Motorola radios arrived prior to 9/11 they just didn't work either. Giuliani, after the 1993 attacks, replaced faulty radios (after 8 years) with even more faulty radios then went back to the previous faulty radios... the same ones they had in 1993. 120 firefighters died in the North Tower, 0 cops because the cops heard the vacate order on their radios.

At the September 11 commission, when asked why given half an hour warning to evacuate the north tower the Firefighters didn't leave he claimed that the firefighters heard the command to get out, and didn't. He lied through his slimy teeth to try to cover his own incompetence. He's now under investigation for this.

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

I could see maybe screwing up and providing crap radios in a no-bid contract for ten times more than they were worth and having them recalled after a week when they almost killed a guy. But, then to blame the firefighters? You are kidding right. This guy is a total slime ball.

"The command center was placed in the towers because the WTC was the most apt place to house the center." -- WHAT!?! That's the LAST PLACE IT SHOULD EVER GO! Giuliani insisted that the terrorist command center be placed in the one place in the city where terrorists had already struck. He looks all impressive running around the city, but that's because he has no place to go! The initial suggestions were to place it in Brooklyn and out of the city completely.

Giuliani is qualified for president by virtue of being over 35 and a US citizen, not because he can claim credit for things he didn't do. Crime rates fell in New York while he was mayor because crime rates fell all over the country. Clinton put the economy back on track and federally funded another 7000 police officers for New York. Crediting Giuliani's leadership is a joke. If anybody Bill Bratton deserves the credit and was declared the 1996 Times Man of the Year for his leadership. Giuliani forced him out of his job.

You say he reported illegal aliens? New York was a sanctuary city. I don't think that's a bad thing, but your claims are absurd at best. As far as "Republican theory in action" he seems to be a rather massive dirt ball. If this were true, shouldn't New York love Giuliani? Clearly they are closest to his job performance... lets see the polls:

http://www.siena.edu...
McCain: 36
Giuliani: 24

Hm. Going down in flames in his home state.

I don't really mind divorce. I don't really mind multiple divorces. But, he cheats on his wives. Honestly, go ahead and get divorced if your marriage isn't working but to start cheating on all your wives and misusing city funds to drive your mistress around? That doesn't exactly scream dependable. Saying it's okay that he's a pompous slimeball who loves the limelight because he takes credit for things he didn't do. Honestly, I don't know what you possibly see in the guy. I could have picked Sharky the Impaler as my candidate of choice and still won.

Edwards is hands down a better candidate. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that any of the Democratic candidates are easily better than any of the Republicans. If you watch the debates they don't even look to be running for the same job. The democrats talk about policy and making things better and the Republicans swear up and down that Iraq is a great idea and that we should stay there forever.

Rudy isn't running on reform. He's running on being a slimeball and continuing the same crappy flawed strategy as Bush used. He wants to replace stupidity with corruption. That isn't a change worth having.

"He claims he would pull all troops out immediately, leaving none behind." - Thank you for making my argument for me. Edwards is clearly a better candidate.

I'm at a loss as to who could possibly be a worse candidate than Rudy. Even the republican side isn't filled with miserable little trolls who love the limelight and ooze corruption.

He was a mediocre mayor and 9/11 happened. He's now a slimeball running for president on the fact that he was a mediocre mayor during 9/11. It's sad. I should have just let some Ron Paul fanatic whoop you.
Debate Round No. 2
wingnut2280

Pro

The contract to Motorola was because the FDNY had a long-term no contest relationship with the company stretching back to the late 70's.

I fyou actually noted the structure of the radio system for the FDNY, instead of listening to 9-11 conspiracy theorists and their blame games, you would know that the faulty radios were hardly the problem. Each radio has exclusive contact with the base radio with the exception of low power, close contact walky-talky like functions. This means the order would have been relayed through a lengthy chain in order to reach the firefighters in time.

Furthermore, on the same website you cited, there are people stating that firefighters had not updated their radios. The blame should be on Motorola for distributing faulty equipment. Giuliani simply made the same decision that mayors had made in the past three decades. There was no way to know that Motorola would drop the ball this time, after twenty five years of no problem service.

As for the terrorist command center, the WTC was the hub for countless critical offices in NYC. It was at the center of downtown and would be easily accesible and nearby. Again, hindsight is twenty twenty, but the WTC housed much more vital offices, which is part of the reason it was attacked. Its resources and location made it fitting.

As for crime, Bratton was appointed by Guiliani! This was a highly contreversial decision at the time. They are famous for being the most dynamic crime duo since batman and robin. Federal funding plays a part in every police station. But, Guiliani and his appointees decreased crime with the same amount of federal funding as before. As for driving him out, Bratton got in trouble for being egotistical and questionable hiring standards. The exact same thing he is getting in trouble for now in LA, void of Rudy.

Rudy's record on crime is impeccable. "Under Mayor Giuliani's leadership, overall crime was cut by 56%, murder was cut by 66%, and New York City—once considered the crime capital of the country—became the safest large city in America according to the FBI. New York City's law enforcement strategy has become a model for other cities around the world." Even if this is partly in thanks to Bratton, that just shows that Rudy is an excellent appointer(?) a presidential skill which is critical.

Sanctuary city how? You give me no evidence of this. He regarded illegals in a practical and applicable sense, as he does every other issue. He recognized that illegals wouldn't report crime at the risk of getting deported, so, in order to get criminals off of the streets, he gave illegals immunity in certain circumstances. He applies theory in an applicable and efficient manner.

The polls aren't indicative of who is a better candidate. People like to vote for a winner. Its no suprise that a guy who is winning primaries is getting bumped in the polls. This comes just days after McCain wins SC. I am personally disappointed in the campaign approach that Rudy has taken. But, the poll numbers are not a reflection of his presidential aptitude. Edwards has one second and numerous thirds. Does this mean your candidate is least apt on the Dem side?

You have provided no evidence that Rudy has cheated on his wives. Note that these allegations of infidelity are coming from a Clinton supporter.

If you watch ANY press conference or question session, Giuliani NEVER takes credit for 9-11. He always thanks the volunteers and the servicemen he has been loyal to throughout his tenure. He gets a bad rap for his 9-11 reputation because he was so heavily involved, but he has been very humble about his role, despite popular opinion.

Obviously, we have policy differences, but there are some common sense, universal issues with John Edwards. The fact that Edwards wants total and immediate withdrawal is not a good thing. I don't have time to even attempt to perrsuade you on Iraq, but even if you desire and support a pullout, Edwards strategy is a bad one. It flies in the face of all military advisors and is more radical than either of his opponents'. Even if you support a pullout, Edwards is a bad candidate. I don't want a president who disregards any military advice or rational safety in order to take a popular stance.

We see Edwards pandering in every issue he takes on. He says he fights for the middle class. Who doesn't think they are in the middle class in America? This is an obvious attempt to appeal to as wide a base as possible.

He masks his socialist ideals with fighter rhetoric. Edwards has admitted garnishing wages in order to make health care mandated. This so-called fighter for the middle class has nothing but distrust for the very people he claism to defend. He thinks people aren't capable of making decisions and wants to make the government HUGE in order to protect citizens from themselves. You think Bush and the Patriot Act infiringe on your liberites? Just wait for an Edwards presidency. If he is admitting his big government, no regard platform now, imagine the steps he will take as president.

We have our policy differences, but even as a Democrat, John Edwards is terribly socialist and a fundamentally BAD candidate.

The fact is, there are always going to be disgruntled oppositions to every candidate. Obama has an entire group committed to convincing voters that he is a Muslim terrorist infiltrating our government. Rudy has a proven record of turning the most terrible stain on America into the safest big city in the country. You admit that he makes awesome appointments. The fact is, even after the worst possible scenario happened he handled the situation well, despite what 9-11 conspirators say.
Tatarize

Con

Why contract only through Motorola? They cost 10 times as much and didn't work! I could see if they were giving you a better deal, but certainly not. Giulini was the one who picked the radio not the FDNY, if FDNY had a choice they would have gotten new radios years earlier. Hardly a problem? They cost 121 firefighters their lives because they didn't work in 1993 or 2001. The same system was used for the cops... and the cops got out because their radios worked!

No field test on radios which failed, buying the same brand as the previous radios, and costing lives for ten times as much as they were worth. Giuliani should be seen as a great leader for making a terrible decision on the grounds that previous mayors bought the same brand? How does that excuse doing nothing for 8 years? The previous radios didn't work either, how is that not dropping the ball?

The WTC was the last place you should place the terrorist command center. Claiming that I'm using hindsite is nonsense... after the 1993 attacks it is simple history.

You don't get to claim you dropped crime when crime everywhere is dropping. Police = good, economy = good, lowering crime = good. Giuliani = irrelevant. An "excellent appointer"? That's a coattail rider if I've ever seen one.

You deny that Rudy ran New York as a sanctuary city and then point out exactly how he illegals immunity? HEHEHEH! Are you watching yourself?

The problem with Giuliani losing in his own hometown is that they are the ones who really know him. Giuliani is losing New York by a lot. Further, his negatives are far higher than his positives. The people who know him, think he's a slime ball.

There's a reason why Ron Paul has 8 more delegates than Giuliani*. Because he's a joke!

No evidence that he cheated on his wives? HE LEFT HIS PREVIOUS WIVES AND MARRIED HIS MISTRESS! His current wife was driven around the city by misused police escorts before he finally left his previous wife and married her. Doesn't cheat on his wives? Are you not counting them if he leaves his wife and marries his mistresses?

Giuliani never takes credit for 9/11? NEVER? Rudy "9/11" Giuliani never does this.

Tell you what, if any voters don't find this statement to be absurdly false... go ahead and vote for Wingnut here. If you note how false it is, go ahead and vote for me. The man ran a fund raiser asking for $9.11 for goodness' sake.

----------------------

Any of the Democrats are far better than any of the Republicans (save perhaps Ron Paul) on specifically the issue of War. It dwarfs all the other issues and a continuation of status quo is completely unacceptable.

The fact that the Democrats (and Ron Paul) see what a horrific situation Iraq is, is a mark in their favor. It's perfectly possible to remove the troops in a few months. Edwards has said repeatedly that he would do it safely and effectively listening to military advice. The current administration has frankly fired all military advisers who don't tow the government line.

Edwards does fight for the middle class, he did so as a trial lawyer and in congress. He comes from the middle class. You can go ahead and call it pandering to tell people what you believe and have people like it. This is the same message he had four years ago when people apparently didn't care about fighting for the middle class and rather wanted somebody who could beat Bush. He was speaking out against poverty and for the middle class then just as he is now. It isn't like Giuliani who suddenly becomes has his positions flip when he runs for office.

You really need to fight the special interest groups in Washington if you're going to stand a chance at changing it for the better.

People don't choose not to have medical insurance, they simply can't afford it. The fact of the matter is every Democratic president in the last 50 years has massively shrunk the size of government whereas every Republican has ballooned it. Edwards has spoken quite well against the Patriot Act whereas Giuliani... not so much.

Even the worst Democrat in this race is better than the best Republican. The problem with the "disgruntled oppositions" to Rudy is that they are by and large true. I absolutely hate the 9/11 conspiracy theorists... and suggesting that the investigation against Rudy Giuliani is part of some vast conspiracy is pathetic. He actually is a slime ball. He actually did do a crappy job.

--------------------

* I said Ron Paul had 8 more delegates than Rudy, which begs the question how many does Rudy have? Zero.

The fact is, even after the worst possible scenario happened he handled the situation well, despite what 9-11 conspirators say.
Debate Round No. 3
wingnut2280

Pro

Motorola is to blame here. Guiliani had no reason to switch companies after 25 years of business with Motorola. Guiliani was simply honoring the relationship that Motorola and NYC had. Again, why switch companies after 25 years? Hindsight is the only reason you can claim. the previous radios broke due to age, not faulty equipment. Motorola made a faulty product. Rudy couldn't have known this.

The WTC housed countless high offices and the like. It had the resources and location. Terrorists have sworn to attack nearly everywhere in large cities. To observe that is to be ignorant. Should we remove all embasies then? The fact is, the WTC was apt and had a central location. Had the attacks been anywhere else, which is pretty much a matter of chance, the WTC would have been hailed as a good choice. Again, hindsight arguments.

Sure, crime was dropping everywhere. But, Rudy took it to new heights in 9-11. The turnaround in the city, even when compared to the rest of the country, is astounding. Talk to any New Yorker about Times Square in the early 90's compared to now. The feds did a good job, but Rudy and his administration are responsible for the phenominal degree of improvement. You pointed this out.

There is a difference between being a sanctuary city and realizing what needs to be done on a practical level. He didn't allow workers to hire illegals or anything related. Rudy took a reasonable approach and the results showed.

He is an excellent appointer. This isn't coattail riding, its a presidential skill. An executive leader can't do everything himself. Rudy has shown that he is an excellent judge of character and ability and will make excellent appointments as president, someone who has to make thousands of them.

You don't get to make arguments about polls when you support someone who is running last in his party. Edwards has yet to win and commonly finishes last. So, how are polls indicative of aptitude? If you want to make your delegates arguments, they apply equally to Edwards.

Guiliani is trailing because winners recieve a bump.

The 9-11 reputation is a matter of popular conception. People are goign to think he leans on 9-11 because that is the popular opinion. He is, in all actuality, very humble about it. He received awards and praise, sure, but he consistently thanks the volunteers and servicepersons. He has a reputation for using it as a crutch because that is the reason he is SO well-known. His pre-9-11 record speaks for itself.

First, the war is no longer the prevailing issue. The economy has people more worried tenfold. Check the polls. On this issue, Guiliani is the strongest. His record of fiscal discipline turned a multi-billion dollar deficit into a multi-billion dollar surplus. None of the Dem candidates have ANY executive experience, especially when dealing with economics.

I get that you don't like the war, but Edwards' strategy is a dangerous one. Of course he is going to say he will listen to military advice, whats his alternative? Is he going to trot out and say "I will personally ignore every military advisor."? Even anti-war politicians criticize Edwards drastic pullout strategy.

What position of Guiliani's has flipped? He has been a Reagan Republican practically since birth.

I agree, special interests are bad.

I know, people want health insurance and can't afford it. So, how does garnishing wages and mandating it help? Some people don't want health care and can afford it. You would make them buy it if they don't want it? Making it affordable is the answer, not treating citizens like children and enforcing government mandates. Edwards is a socialist who would strip the American people of individual rights. Your complaining about the PA when edwards would commit far greater atrocities. None of this you deny. You simply say that Edward's socialist platform is good. This isn't so.

I get that you have personal beef with Rudy. But, despite your name-calling, he is a proven policy genius. We are left with Rudy, who has failed marriages. Against Edwards, who you admit is essentially a socialist.
Tatarize

Con

You bothered to defend his blunders and if I were to believe you I could surmise that Rudy Giuliani (it's 'i' before 'u' by the way, though watching you misspell your candidates name is amusing) is simply an average guy to whom bad stuff happens and other people around him screw up. Why switch? Because the previous radios didn't work. They didn't break due to age in fact they worked fine most of the time between the first WTC attack (when they failed) and the second WTC attack (when they failed). If they had broken due to age they would have been absolutely worthless in those eight years Rudy Giuliani did nothing after it was well known that the radios would not function at the WTC. Honoring the business relationship by choosing the company that gave you radios that didn't work before? Why then pay ten times as much at the 11th hour? Why pay 14 million for 1.4 million dollars worth of radios that didn't even last a week AFTER 8 years of doing nothing to replace the radios that didn't work before. Why maintain a business relationship with Motorola for bad radios? Why not let market forces work and get cheaper, better, functional radios?

Seriously, two posts ago you were blaming the city council for hampering the radio selection. Though, looking that up as the lie it was, now it's Motorola's fault for what? Providing radios that Giuliani never had field tested before buying? Making the previously bad radios that kind of worked save in the WTC and similar buildings? For making the police radios which worked fine and let the officers evacuate? Did Motorola force Giuliani to wait 8 years before replacing the faulty radios? Did Motorola force Giuliani to ignore the free market system and give them an exclusive contract they used to jack up the price by 12.6 million at the last minute?

Everybody's to blame for this except Giuliani? You're a worse liar than he is!

This line is absolutely classic: "Motorola made a faulty product. Rudy couldn't have known this." -- He was buying radios to replace Motorola's LAST FAULTY PRODUCT!

You continue trying to defend the location of the Terror Command Center in the WTC. The terrorists TRIED TO BLOW IT UP BEFORE! That's not hindsight!

*sticks hand on burner*
OUCH!
*sticks hand on burner again*
OUCH!
-- You shouldn't have done that.
Hindsight is 20/20.

Really? The only place in the city attacked by terrorists previously where terrorists have sworn to attack again and you're going to say that it's just as good as Brooklyn? Nobody would attack Brooklyn, it's Brooklyn.

Yes, crime was dropping everywhere and the massive increase in federal funding for additional policing (outside of Giuliani's control) helped out a lot. The policing and economy improving had nothing to do with Giuliani, how do you get from "sure crime was already plummeting and the feds helped a lot" to Rudy responsible for the "phenominal[sic] degree"? How so?

There is no difference between a sanctuary city and a city where Rudy Giuliani allowed illegal immigrants to not be deported.

"If you want to make your delegates arguments, they apply equally to Edwards." -- Okay. John Edwards has infinity percent more delegates than Rudy Giuliani. Shoot, Ron Paul has infinity percent more delegates than Rudy Giuliani. I have as many delegates for the republican nomination as Rudy Giuliani.

"Guiliani is trailing because winners recieve a bump." -- And... Giuliani is a loser. Thank you for admitting that.

"...9-11 reputation...think he leans on 9-11... His pre-9-11 record speaks for itself." -- Heh.

The war is very much a prevailing issue.
http://www.pollingreport.com...

The majority still want to withdrawal and regardless who the eventual nominee may be, it probably is still going to cost the Republicans the election. And in the general Democrat vs. Republican ballot, the Democrats are currently winning 48 to 30 and a lot of that is the still the war.

So your argument boils down to Rudy 9/11 is a genius and all that really bad moronic stuff he was responsible for is caused by city council or some company or was honestly a good idea. 9/11. He's only trailing because he's a loser! 9/11.

-------

Edwards understands that people need a real voice in government beyond the lobbying of corporations if there is going to be any real change in America for the better. People want healthcare and can't afford it, helping them in this respect is advantageous for everybody. Getting out of this war is the one issue that really can't be avoided. Ron Paul is better than Rudy strictly for that issue. If you watch the Republican debate yesterday you'd have noticed Paul make this comment to the agreement of the entire crowd. Not only is getting out of Iraq a major point in this election but the eventual nominee is going to lose on that point and lose pretty hard. Moreover, it's the right thing to do. Get out of Bush's retarded worthless war as soon as possible. Support for renewable energy, fixing our schools, and again... getting out of this flipping war.

Rudy is not better than anybody running for office this race. He's a corrupt little slimeball, a tool, who quite honestly exploits a national tragedy every chance he gets. During the 90s every mayor in the states could just as easily have claimed credit for reducing crime. You argue that Rudy is a great "appointer" as a way to give him credit for things he didn't do, and then blame others for the things he does do extremely wrong. If I offer that he closed down the city dump and cost the city million upon millions of dollars in a cheap political stunt prior to his run for senate you'll suggest that it was a good idea or that its a bad idea that somebody else made. Honestly, he's going down in flames because you can only exploit tragedy and a myth about semi-competence before people see you for who you are.

Giuliani married his cousin.
Giuliani has been married three times.
Giuliani cheats on his wives.
Giuliani wears dresses.
Giuliani used the remains of 9/11 victims to fill potholes.
Giuliani built his terrorism command center in the twin towers. Critics argued that those might be the attacked and would serve as a poor base.
Giuliani failed to get firefighters' radios replaced after the 1993 attacks. This lead to the deaths of many firefighters who fell out of communication.
Giuliani betrayed the heroes of 9/11 and is now fairly universally hated by the firefighters in question.
Giuliani is running on nothing except his record of failure at 9/11.

John Edwards may be an idealist, but I'll take idealism over a slimeball every time.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by txgopkid 9 years ago
txgopkid
Both candidates are losers.
Posted by wingnut2280 9 years ago
wingnut2280
tousche cobjob!! tousche!!!!
Posted by Cobjob 9 years ago
Cobjob
Rudy and Johnny E! Why don't we talk about candidates that have a prayer of winning their party's nomination?
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
Zarul, I totally debated that. Instant win. Though, when you're dealing with the bottom of the barrel, you don't need to resort to gimmicks to win.
Posted by zarul 9 years ago
zarul
Tatarize should say that he supports Rudy, and that Rudy is not better than himself.
Posted by Jlconservative 9 years ago
Jlconservative
wingnut I support Rudy 100% so your not the only one and your correct in creating this debate if you read anything mazoo instead of the title he is trying to show you facts to prove he is a better candidate make sure you know what your talking about before you try and bash someone mrmazoo at least read the freaking post
Posted by mrmazoo 9 years ago
mrmazoo
Debates of the form "X is better than Y" are ridiculous.

You are stating an opinion, wingnut, and opinions can not be subject to debate.

You might as well debate someone on "Blue is better than red."
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 7 years ago
Tatarize
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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 
Vote Placed by Alex 8 years ago
Alex
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by zach12 8 years ago
zach12
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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 Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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 FreedomPete 9 years ago
FreedomPete
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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 
Vote Placed by Cobjob 9 years ago
Cobjob
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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 MINNESOTAGphers3 9 years ago
MINNESOTAGphers3
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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 
Vote Placed by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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 mattresses 9 years ago
mattresses
wingnut2280TatarizeTied
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