The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

The Democratic Party and Republican Party are not the same party with different names

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/21/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,521 times Debate No: 42757
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (29)
Votes (2)




I will be debating the motion of that the "The Democratic and Republican Parties are not the same party with different names." As the pro side I will be arguing that the Democratic and Republican parties are distinctively different parties with different agendas.

Round 1-Acceptence
Round 2-Opening Argument
Round 3-Closing Arguments and Rebuttals


I'm looking forward to this debate and have been mentally preparing for it for a while. My argument is going to show that The United States has been operating under a one party system that masquerades as a 2 party system for quite some time. Good luck I look forward to this debate.
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank Con for accepting. I will limit the primary reasons to three points.

1. Different reasoning
The Democratic Party tends to lean left. While the Republican Party leans right. The left-right spectrum tends to be viewed as the separation between those who believe in equality and those who do not subscribe to equality. Left is associated with equality while the right is associated with inequality. The difference is not absolute because there are individuals who subscribe to some left wing and some right wing ideas(1).

(1)Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction-Bobbio

2. Difference theories about governance
The two parties have distinctively different ideas on how the United States should be governed. Here is the two party platforms.
Democratic Platform:
Republican Platform:

3. Different in practice
Not a single Republican voted for the ACA.


I am not going to argue the parties are identical. They are clearly not. My argument is they are different factions of the same party.The word same has different connotations then the word identical. My characters are very limited so I you to do the work to familiarize yourself with unfamiliar concepts mentioned.
1.A political party can contain a wide range of views. Different factions can make up the same party. These facts are self evident..
2. The party's themselves contain a wider range of views independently then the people ultimately elected do regardless of party affiliation. The people elected generally conform to the median voter.
3.80% -90% of all policy decisions by congress can be explained in one dimensional policy space.
4. Study's have shown that median voter theorem can explain Federal, state and local spending as well as international tarrifs .
Debate Round No. 2


The Republican coalition is made up of Fiscal conservatives,Libertarians,Neoconservatives,Paleoconservatives,Progressive Conservatives, and Social conservatives.The Democratic coalition is made up of Environmentalists,Labor Supporters,Progressives,Minorities,Neoconservatives,and Social liberals.There is more too.
"The people elected generally conform to the median voter"
The two party system has not been polarized as much as in recent history(1).States are no longer even competitive in the Presidential elections.For example what would be the point in a Republican presidential nominee campaigning in New York in the main election.He won't win New York.
(1)"Portrait of Political Party Polarization,"James Moody,Peter J. Mucha

The two parties are distinctively different, not similar at all.They share some of the centrists but that is it.I would like to thank Con for participating in this debate.If you feel that I have adequately shown a solid distinction between the two parties,Vote Pro.


Not only do the party's share some of the centrists.the centrists are the only ones getting elected. Take a look at people competing for the same seat and winning. If you conclude the political ideology of people winning the same political seat such as Bush and Obama are closer then people of the same political party such as Bush and Ron Paul, or Obama and. Lyndon LaRouche, then you must conclude the party's are the same.

If you look at the median voter theorem and decide it is a much better indicator of how a politician will act once he is in office. Then you must conclude that they are the same party.

There is a big show put on by both sides to convince you they are 2 wildly different parties. But the fact of the matter is these shows have been debunked. These shows just take advantage of the rare lone nut in each party and use that lone nut to scare supporters.
Debate Round No. 3
29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Your right Tophatdoc. Thanks for the for the much needed common sense advice
Posted by Tophatdoc 2 years ago
@Wylted, there is no need to argue with him. You don't know him and he is not worth remembering either. If your going to use your time, use it on better things then arguing with someone who only wants to incite your anger.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Proof once again you lack the intellect to be capable of tact. The guy who just recently became aware that the words "same" and "identical" have different connotations says I need an education. The reason every single one of your comments have been negative, mocking, and condescending ( tools of the ignorant when they feel inferior), is because you lack the intelligence to gain self esteem through any other method.

Most previous example of your intellectual inferiority. I make a light hearted joke to remind you that you would be happier if you stop focusing on the negative or if you direct your internal tensions to something productive.

You respond to my multi layered tactful message towards you by saying what amounts to " your stupid "
Aka a kindergarten level insult. Its sad that I even had to break down what I said to you so you would understand.

Here is your chance to demonstrate you have an IQ above 25. You will prove it in one of the following 3 ways.

1. Realizing you were being dumb and respectfully go away.

2. Coming up with some sort of comeback that contains some sort of creativity and intelligence behind it. " your stupid" doesn't count. Especially when the insult isn't accompanied by any sort of reasoning to explain it ( level 1 reasoning doesn't count ).

3. You'll be a man and apologize for being so ignorant. I know you won't take this option though. It doesn't prove intellect if you take this option because you aren't man enough to own up to your mistakes

Any other options but these indicate your are of inferior intellect unless you can give a detailed explanation of your reasoning.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 2 years ago
I recommend going back to school
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Veritas I reccomend masterbation. Maybe it will relieve some of that tension, and you won't be in this constant state of negativity.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 2 years ago
"So first Conduct- Fairly even, but pro seemed to just squeeze some fake 'thanks' in @ the end of round 2 so Con takes conduct."

One of the dumbest voters on DDO for one of the dumbest debates on DDO.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Thanks I appreciate that
Posted by Tophatdoc 2 years ago
Wylted, I thought the debate was good. I kept the character limit short because I thought a conspiracy theorist was going to accept it. I didn't want them ranting and rambling. But I am glad you accepted the debate.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Tophatdoc, this was my first debate on here. I learned from this to take a closer look at structure before accepting a debate. I'm glad I learned this with my very first debate. When you have an extremely difficult point to prove and your opponent has a relatively easy one then don't accept debates that are structured in a way that severely limits your characters. I'm not making excuses, I'm just sincerely thanking you for teaching me this valuable lesson right out of the gate. I won't soon forget it.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Inninoveritos apparantly you lack the intellect to see that the word -same- and the word -identical- have different connotations. Please go read some scholarly articles on the origons of both words. I explained how the word same can be used to explain certain situations that the word identical can't. Even though both words can have the same meaning the word -same- can be used in a much wider context then the word -identical-. If you want we can start a debate on if the word -same- is always and in every circumstance interchangeable with the word identical. We can include in that debate if the words have different connotations as well.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Both debaters could stand to explain their points much more thoroughly, these are pretty basic evaluations of the parties with not much support for either side. I end up confused as to what we're arguing. Are we talking about divisions between parties as a whole, or just nominees? Pro argues the former, Con argued the latter. I never hear which should matter most. That being said, I think it is Pro's burden within the round to establish at least one hard line of separation. He just doesn't do it. Equality, from his own argument, crosses party lines. It's not a hard line if people on the left and right subscribe to it. You also have to do some work on describing what parts of their governance are different, rather than just providing links. That's just lazy. They're better links than Con provides, but that's not helpful if you're not elucidating what argument they give you. Con also needs to do more than just give links, especially since yours are more involved and require parsing
Vote Placed by amik10 2 years ago
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:52 
Reasons for voting decision: So first Conduct- Fairly even, but pro seemed to just squeeze some fake "thanks" in @ the end of round 2 so Con takes conduct. Score: Con 1 Pro 0 S&G goes to Con also b/c pro forget some spaces at the end of round 2. Score Con:2 Pro:0 Arguments-Neither side refutes the other but Con makes a lot of speculation about Obama and Bush having the same political views, but that is simply not true. He forget to address all the thousands of other members of each party. Pro gives good arguments about left wing and right wing so he wins argument Score: Pro:3 Con:2 Sources-both give good sources, but I'm going to give it to Con because he uses more. Pro uses better sources, especially both parties platforms, so Pro wins! Score: PRO-5 CON-2