The Instigator
nightfox_328
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
wingnut2280
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Should public icons such as Opra Winfree be alowed to make a public baking of presidential canidates

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: 2/14/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,006 times Debate No: 2650
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

nightfox_328

Con

I do not think think that media icons that hae the ear of the country should publicly back presidential canidates becaus they cn sway the vote and it gives certin ones an unfare advantage, i.e.when opra went on the cmpaing trail with Barrack Obama how man y thousands of people voted for him becuse she backed him, how many people voted blindly. we can not affored o keep this up because no one will know the issues they will just be voting because some one they like said to.
wingnut2280

Pro

There are a few problems with this. I'll start with the most obvious.

Its a clear violation of free speech. Disallowing anyone from broadcasting their believes is unconstitutional. Thats enough to moot the point right there.

Also, celebrity endorsements don't really have the impact that you make it seem. While we can't know for sure, not many people vote for a candidate because Tom Cruise gives them two thumbs up. If this were true, every Sean Penn fan would be writing in someone more socialist than Barack.

Next, people can have any reason to vote for whomever they wish. If I want to vote for Barack simply because Oprah likes him, its my right to do so.

Finally, celebrity endorsements are a good thing. They give people insight into the candidates and involve people who would otherwise be apathetic. For instance, I like Oprah because she represents a lot of what I believe. I don't have a clue who to vote for or am not going to vote at all. Once I see her endorsement, I may realize that Obama is good enough to share Oprah's views and would therefore hold mine. It would get me out to the polls and inform me of the candidates more.

So, what you are proposing is unconstitutional. Not only that, but celebrity endorsements don't really have the impact you imply. Even if they did, that impact is positive as it motivates and informs voters. Finally, its my right to vote for whomever I wish for whatever reason I wish.
Debate Round No. 1
nightfox_328

Con

nightfox_328 forfeited this round.
wingnut2280

Pro

Again, your position is unconstitutional. Also, celebrity endorsements aren't really effective and even in the instance that they persuade people, they have the right to vote for whatever reason they see fit. I hope you respond next round and give me something to work with. Refer to my last post.
Debate Round No. 2
nightfox_328

Con

nightfox_328 forfeited this round.
wingnut2280

Pro

wingnut2280 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
nightfox_328

Con

nightfox_328 forfeited this round.
wingnut2280

Pro

wingnut2280 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
Not necessarily. Statistics show that heart disease is the number one killer in America. Baking our presidential candidates is a healthier alternative to frying them.
Posted by SolaGratia 9 years ago
SolaGratia
I think it should be illegal for ANYONE to bake a presidential candidate. It could be very harmful. ;)

Honestly, the typos on this site have to be seen to be believed.
Posted by Patrick_Henry 9 years ago
Patrick_Henry
We don't let our federal government employees openly back and support candidates.

We consider it unprofessional for generals to engage in the political debate.

If we place restrictions on people who are qualified to have an opinion, certainly the same ethics should be applied to those who aren't.

A disappointment in Oprah's endorsement of Obama, is the failure of his competition to point out that a billionaire endorsed him. We should always back a candidate supported by billionaires without question. It's the point of democracy.

But, hey. None of the campaigns really decided to turn Oprah's endorsement into a bad thing. I suppose it's fear of a billionaires' wraith?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
nightfox_328wingnut2280Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: FF. Also this debate was over baking, not backing. Get it right!