The Instigator
qwzx
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
frankfurter50
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The Democratic Party

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 1 vote the winner is...
qwzx
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/5/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 886 times Debate No: 102430
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (18)
Votes (1)

 

qwzx

Con

Round 1 is only acceptance and I wish my opponent good luck if my opponent wishes to accept the debate.
frankfurter50

Pro

yeah, I agree. I've been on here for half a year now, and I've never debated a democrat. seems like most people on here are republicans. I'm ready for your stuff.
Debate Round No. 1
qwzx

Con

The Democratic Party is a negative force today for many reasons

Their championship of affirmative action

Affirmative action is a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the act outlawed all sorts of discrimination against anyone based on race, gender, and religion, and included desegregation of public schools. Affirmative action was originally meant to increase opportunity has turned into something that favors one race or gender over another, thus discriminating the non-preferred groups. What we see today is that if an employer has two possible job candidates, one is a white male; the other is a black female". due to these affirmative action policies, the employer will prefer the black woman to be hired over the Caucasian male, even if the woman is less qualified for the job. Resulting from this is that the employer may not have the qualified employee he needs, and the well qualified man will not have the job he is qualified for and also needs. Thomas Sowell has theorized that affirmative action policies encourage members of non-preferred groups to classify themselves as members of preferred groups, thus reaping the benefits or affirmative action. He makes the case that members of the middle to upper class of the black community reap the most benefits, as they are considered members of the preferred groups by race, while non-preferred groups such as poor Caucasians cannot receive any of these benefits. The fact of the matter is that affirmative action policies are based on race, and not economic situation.

Their support in raising Minimum wage

Democrats argue that raising the minimum wage boosts the economy without costing jobs. However, Congress had already tried this when they applied the 2007 minimum wage increase to American Samoa. Despite increasing Samoa"s minimum wage, it did not boost consumer spending, stimulate the economy, or create jobs. It did not even boost pay. Samoan unemployment jumped from 5 percent to 36 percent. Wages actually fell 11% due to inflation. An increased minimum wage simply provides no net stimulus. Businesses will not pay workers more than the value they create thus leaving to laying off their workers increasing unemployment rates.

Their support for more gun control

Gun control laws won"t stop mass shootings. In nearly all these cases, however, more restrictive gun laws would not have stopped the shooters from legally obtaining a firearm. Less than 1% of gun crime are committed by assault weapons (despite many gun control regulations aimed at assault weapons). Most mass shootings are perpetrated individuals with little to no history of insanity or violence. It is also proven that guns are the most effective means of self-defense. Studies show that there is a correlation with an increase in guns with a decrease in crime. Gun laws haven"t worked in the U.S. A recent study by Quinnipiac University studied 30 years of statistics, and determined that stricter gun control laws have not correlated with a reduction in crime. A notable examples of such failures include Chicago. A Harvard University study debunked the myth that the rate of intentional deaths is higher in the U.S. than in countries with restrictive gun control laws. Multiple statistic simply proves that the ability to legally obtain guns have little correlation with murders.

Sources
https://www.nps.gov...
http://www.ontheissues.org...
https://plato.stanford.edu...
http://www.google.com...
http://www.gao.gov...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.gunfacts.info...
frankfurter50

Pro

There have been more republicans than democrats in the white house, but this is only because the ideology of the parties wills it so. Republicans are richer, and therefore have more power in the American society. Most republican presidents have been involved in some scandal, such as Nixon.

Democrats stand up for the poor. you blatantly mock them. Democrats despise the military, who kill thousands of harmless foreigners, you cheer them on. What am I telling you for? it's like talking to a rock.
Debate Round No. 2
qwzx

Con

First of all, you did not really address any of my points. However, I will not hold it against you since I did not specify that you had to for the previous round. I shall now attempt to debunk your arguments.

"There have been more republicans than democrats in the white house, but this is only because the ideology of the parties wills it so. Republicans are richer, and therefore have more power in the American society."

First of all, this doesn't exactly argue for why the Democratic Party is necessarily a good thing. It merely states that Republicans have more power in our society. Whether is true is questionable due to the lack of sources or really any study to back up your claims.

"Most republican presidents have been involved in some scandal, such as Nixon."

Again this doesn't exactly argue for why the Democratic Party is necessarily a good thing. While it does argue that the Republican Party is not always a force of good, it has little place in this debate. We are primarily discussing the Democratic Party and I am frankly confused as to why you would bring up Republicans and their occasionally shady past. After all Democrats have never had any scandals taken place. Especially not somewhere as important like the White House!
That would really suck...... (I am not a Republican btw)

"Democrats stand up for the poor. you blatantly mock them. Democrats despise the military, who kill thousands of harmless foreigners, you cheer them on. What am I telling you for? it's like talking to a rock."

Now this is an argument that actually involves the Democratic Party in some way. Most of this is really ad-hominem attacks so it is hard to sort out the main points. I will continue to treat my opponent with the same respect as before but I do urge my opponent to avoid such emotionally charged arguments.
As for his arguments, he states:
1. "Democrats stand up for the poor"
2. "Democrats despise the military"
3. I apparently mock the poor?
4. I also apparently support civilian casualties?
Conclusion: Time to check my nonwhite privilege....gosh darnit

Rebuttals
"Democrats stand up for the poor"
This statement is really vague. How does one "stand up" for the poor? If you want to talk about giving out unemployment checks to the poor then yes.....the Democrats do "stand up" for the poor. If you however, believe that helping people get more money thus improving their lives is "standing up" for the poor then, the Democrats have failed miserably. Real wages (includes the factor of inflation) show that the lives of Americans have been going downhill, however it has just been slowly recovering since the Democrats lost the Presidency and Congress.

"Democrats despise the military"
Actually, many democratic leaders have proposed increasing our current military strength. Many encourage military careers and many wish to equip our soldiers with newer and deadlier technologies.

Sources
https://www.bls.gov...
http://www.ontheissues.org...
http://shop.wwe.com...
frankfurter50

Pro

you see, in the old days, the republicans were the good guys and the democrats were the bad guys, but today, that has switched completely. You, of course deny this. You believe that the ku klux klan still exists and such, probably in keeping with your immense love of the past.

Today, democrats are the ones who support the poor, and since most minorities are poorer than white people, democrats therefore support minorities. Trump, on the other hand, a devout republican, is a racist, sexist block of cheese who says that "laziness is a trait of blacks". really, which one seems more racist to you?

Gun control is important. Your argument, "guns don't kill people, people do," could be used, if, say, there were riots in which people were killed with slingshots. the facts stand, though, that guns are the most popular weapon among people who kill other people. I can think of a very humorous anecdote:

A republican comes into a room and finds that his son has shot himself in the head. the republican says, "good boy, Jimmy! you're exercising your constitutional rights!"

Republicans also support guns because they are far wealthier, and therefore more at risk to be robbed from by the poor. which brings me to your argument against the poor.

You see, the more we take from the rich and give to the poor, the closer we are to equality. The more we take away from the poor and give to the rich, the more unequal we are. it's simple arithmetic, really. You republicans refuse to give money because, naturally, you've gotten to the top and don't want to give it all up. You do not drive this country toward progress. You drive us away from it. this is your ideology.

Poor people are not "lazy." they are unable to make money because of YOU! don't you get it? you rob them, so, in turn, they become more and more desperate, until they collapse. Everybody can not be as successful as you. nobody can abruptly jump from being poor to being rich. This takes years. democrats support taxes, which help the poor get to where you are now.

seriously, WHY DON'T YOU GET IT?
Debate Round No. 3
qwzx

Con

My opponent has once again resorted to ad-hominem attack on this round. I have already excused his behavior and had warned him in the previous round. Please feel free to deduct his point based on conduct.

(you see, in the old days, the republicans were the good guys and the democrats were the bad guys, but today, that has switched completely. You, of course deny this. You believe that the ku klux klan still exists and such, probably in keeping with your immense love of the past.)

The party ideology switching is actually a myth. The demographics changed....no question but this stupid idea that Democratic Party magically became this party of good and tolerance which got all the African Americans to leave the racist Republican party is nonsensical. Blacks mainly left the Republican party around the 1930s and the era where the dixiecrats left the Democratic party was around the 1960s or 1970s. The reason why African Americans left the Republican Party was essentially bribery. The democrats were just handing out free money during the New-Deal era. This does not necessarily prove as to why the Democratic Party has a positive effect on America.

(Today, democrats are the ones who support the poor, and since most minorities are poorer than white people, democrats therefore support minorities. Trump, on the other hand, a devout republican, is a racist, sexist block of cheese who says that "laziness is a trait of blacks". really, which one seems more racist to you?)

Again, I am not a republican so these obviously anti-Trump or anti-Republican arguments don't really affect me. Again, you have not proven as to how Democrats necessarily help the "poor". Also it pains me to tell you but Trump is NOT a devout republican and has fairly been quite liberal on several issues in the past.

(Gun control is important. Your argument, "guns don't kill people, people do," could be used, if, say, there were riots in which people were killed with slingshots. the facts stand, though, that guns are the most popular weapon among people who kill other people. I can think of a very humorous anecdote:
A republican comes into a room and finds that his son has shot himself in the head. the republican says, "good boy, Jimmy! you're exercising your constitutional rights!"
Republicans also support guns because they are far wealthier, and therefore more at risk to be robbed from by the poor. which brings me to your argument against the poor.)

This does not disprove any of my statistics in the slightest. Multiple studies and statics show that gun control does not decrease number of gun violence cases. Again, these anti-republican rants don't prove as to why the Democrats are a force of good. I like to see your sources before you make these claims about how Republicans support guns due to an increased amount of wealth.

(You see, the more we take from the rich and give to the poor, the closer we are to equality. The more we take away from the poor and give to the rich, the more unequal we are. it's simple arithmetic, really.)

That's...kinda communist first of all. Also equality does not mean equity. There are people that are unfortunately missing limbs in this world. Equity would be giving these cripples a chance to succeed in life by giving them some job opportunities whenever possible. YOUR approach to this situation is to cut off everyone's limbs ensuring that equality is maintained. No one gets limbs....you must agree with this logic after all, "it's simple arithmetic, really".

(You republicans refuse to give money because, naturally, you've gotten to the top and don't want to give it all up. You do not drive this country toward progress. You drive us away from it. this is your ideology.)

Again this does not prove as to why the Democratic Party is a force of good. Giving out free money isn't a solution in helping out poor people. Enabling them jobs would be a solution and it has been proven that Democrats have a history of losing jobs through ridiculous regulations on businesses.

(Poor people are not "lazy." they are unable to make money because of YOU! don't you get it? you rob them, so, in turn, they become more and more desperate, until they collapse. Everybody can not be as successful as you. nobody can abruptly jump from being poor to being rich. This takes years. democrats support taxes, which help the poor get to where you are now.)

I have never said that poor people are lazy in any way. However, your solution of merely just handing poor people money is just not an answer. People that win the lottery do not stay rich not because they don't have money. Many poor people don't handle money very well....its the definition of being poor essentially. What will help poor people is by allowing them to receive jobs. Rich people tend to create jobs by creating businesses and by taxing them less. This will allow them to consolidate their wealth. What we see is when rich people consolidate their wealth, they start using this money by creating businesses to increase their wealth. These new businesses require more workers which increases the amount of jobs. This is simple economics.

My opponent has really only been using ad-hoc arguments and ad-hominem attacks this entire time. He has failed to even address my points about Affirmative action and minimum wage. He makes a feeble attempt on gun control by completely resorting on unbased claims and assertions. He fails to address my statistics regarding gun control and gun violence. All of his points don't really prove as to why the Democrats are a force of good. All he has done really... is repeatedly attack the Republican party. He made a grand total of 5 ad-hoc arguments, 9 ad-hominem attacks and 0 sources.

His ad-hoc arguments and other equally flawed points/reasoning
1. Republicans are richer, and therefore have more power in the American society.
2. Most republican presidents have been involved in some scandal, such as Nixon.
3. the republicans were the good guys and the democrats were the bad guys, but today, that has switched completely
4. most minorities are poorer than white people, democrats therefore support minorities
5. Republicans also support guns because they are far wealthier, and therefore more at risk to be robbed from by the poor

His ad-hominmem attacks
1. Democrats stand up for the poor. you blatantly mock them
2. Democrats despise the military, who kill thousands of harmless foreigners, you cheer them on.
3. it's like talking to a rock
4. You believe that the ku klux klan still exists and such, probably in keeping with your immense love of the past.
5. You republicans refuse to give money because, naturally, you've gotten to the top and don't want to give it all up.
6. You do not drive this country toward progress
7. You drive us away from it. this is your ideology.
8. Poor people are not "lazy." they are unable to make money because of YOU!
9. don't you get it? you rob them, so, in turn, they become more and more desperate, until they collapse

This is a pretty clear cut and easy debate. Please vote Con if you believe that I have won. I wish my opponent the best of luck and hope that voters will judge fairly and accurately based on the points discussed, dropped, debunked, etc.

Sources
http://www.cleveland.com...
https://www.inc.com...
http://www.heritage.org...
frankfurter50

Pro

i know you'll win, because only republicans vote on here. Republicans are rich fiends, Democrats are kindly poor people. it is black and white. i don't know what else to say. republicans refuse to accept truth. I can't help that.
Debate Round No. 4
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by frankfurter50 9 months ago
frankfurter50
I've never heard of a fairy tale character like that. Is it a cross between Puss in boots and the troll in the 3 billy goats gruff?
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 9 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
@franktrollfurter50 Also, why can't you be a man enough to post your next round, instead of arguing in the comment section?
You're a p*ssy troll.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 9 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
@frankfurtergruff50 How am I much worse, when you are mentally ill. Not me.

"what with your bizarre view of the world and whatnot." Exactly! You are mentally ill!
Posted by frankfurter50 9 months ago
frankfurter50
But you're much worse, what with your bizarre view of the world and whatnot.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 9 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
You are still awful now.
Posted by frankfurter50 9 months ago
frankfurter50
Yeah, I did. I was awful at this a year ago.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 9 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
@frankfurter50 You deserved to lose.
Posted by frankfurter50 1 year ago
frankfurter50
i'm not "attacking" you, I'm just pointing out that republicans are the only ones who ever vote on here.
Posted by frankfurter50 1 year ago
frankfurter50
heh, heh, It is pretty annoying. anyway, you better start. only 18 hours left!
Posted by frankfurter50 1 year ago
frankfurter50
heh, heh, It is pretty annoying. anyway, you better start. only 18 hours left!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by passwordstipulationssuck 1 year ago
passwordstipulationssuck
qwzxfrankfurter50Tied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: When I was scrolling through the voting period debates and saw my old buddy frankfurter. I just couldn't help myself. Pro made many ad hominem and ad-hoc attacks which is inexcusable. pro provided zero sources and successfully took down zero of cons points. Con wins the conduct points because of pro's terrible mannerisms and unprofessional conduct. convincing arguments is won in a landslide by con. Con brings up statistics and facts that pro either dismisses with fallacious attacks or ignores completely. con provided numerous sources while pro provided none. I look forward to getting attacked in the comments section by Frankfurter as soon as he sees that I voted. I really enjoyed our bout in the comments section of our debate after all.