The Instigator
WilliamsP
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
msheahan99
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The Modern Republican Party

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...
WilliamsP
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,066 times Debate No: 49212
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

WilliamsP

Con

This debate will regard the modern Republican Party. The focus will be from the early 1900s to present-day. I am a supporter of the Lincoln-led and Civil War era Republican Party, but I am opposed to the modern GOP, such as John Boehner, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, among many others. In this debate, I will argue that the modern Republican Party should not be trusted and that its policies are unsuccessful. My opponent will argue that the party should be trusted and that its policies are successful.

I would like to implement a few crucial rules before we begin:

1. Sources must be cited using the MLA format. Failure to do so will result in the loss of the "reliable sources" points in the votes.

2. Proper grammar and spelling will be used. If this is not done, the candidate(s) will lose the "spelling and grammar" points.

3. There will be no forfeiting. Forfeiting will result in the loss of the "conduct" points.

Now, I will state how the debate will be structured:

Round One: Acceptance
Round Two: Main Arguments
Round Three:
Rebuttals / Supporting Arguments
Round Four:
Further Rebuttal / Main Argument Review
Round Five:
Final Rebuttals / Conclusion Paragraph

I look forward to this debate. I intend for it to be mature, rational, and logical. I want this debate to be based on facts, not opinions.
msheahan99

Pro

I accept your challenge, I accept all aforementioned rules and I hope for a quality debate.
Debate Round No. 1
WilliamsP

Con

An Introduction

I would like to begin by thanking my opponent (msheahan99) for accepting this debate. I look forward to debating with him and I am enthusiastic about this debate. Before we begin, I would like to remind my opponent and the voters that this debate will be SPECIFICALLY about the Republican Party of the modern era. We will discuss other parties and historical occurrences in the rounds to come, but the main focus will continue to be the Republican Party. Now, I would like to define two key terms.


mod·ern

[mod-ern]

adjective

1.

of or pertaining to present and recent time; not ancient or remote: modern city life.

2.

characteristic of present and recent time; contemporary; not antiquated or obsolete: modernviewpoints.

3.

of or pertaining to the historical period following the Middle Ages: modern European history.

4.

of, pertaining to, or characteristic of contemporary styles of art, literature, music, etc., that rejecttraditionally accepted or sanctioned forms and emphasize individual experimentation and sensibility.

5.

( initial capital letter ) new ( def 12 ) .



We will utilize definition one of the word “modern.”



re·pub·li·can

adjective

1.

of, pertaining to, or of the nature of a republic.

2.

favoring a republic.

3.

fitting or appropriate for the citizen of a republic: a very republican notion.

4.

( initial capital letter ) of or pertaining to the Republican Party.

noun

5.

a person who favors a republican form of government.

6.

( initial capital letter ) a member of the Republican Party.



Of “republican”, we will utilize definition six.



Now, let’s begin.




Main Argument

I will organize the main argument into sections. Each section will be highly detailed and will include a wide array of evidence. This evidence will be reliable and it will be interpreted correctly. All evidence listed will have sources and each source will be cited in the MLA format at the end of the argument.



Point One: Republican Economics

According to polcymic.com, “[t]he deadweight of foreclosures came with the explosion of the housing market during a Republican administration following Republican economic policies. Home building is now turning forward steadily, which will soon lead to a lot of economic activity and hiring, under a Democratic administration.” This debate is primarily about the Republican Party, but I would like to make a few comparisons of the two parties throughout this debate. Policymic continues to state that,”Republican economic policies ruined America. We are still sorting through some of the charred wreckage from the last Republican-controlled Congress and Presidency. Republicans' biggest complaint after their economic policy burnt the house down leaving everyone's fathers, mothers, neighbors, and relatives unemployed is that Democrats have not cleaned up Republicans' mess fast enough.



I would like to remind you of the 2008 recession George W. Bush will be remembered for. He was a Republican. His administration wasn’t even too long ago. It was fairly recent. Therefore, I believe he fits the definition of a “modern Republican.” I will not say any more about him. I believe you know the facts, as do I, as do must of us.



Politicususa.com states, “Republicans have not made any proposal that asks the wealthiest Americans to pay a bit more in taxes to help pay down the nation’s debt, but they have asked every American to take a financial hit. By now, most people have learned about Medicare cuts, Social Security cuts, health care cuts, and restrictions on exemptions aimed at the middle class, but unlike the President’s proposal, Republicans do not extend the payroll tax holiday every working American has benefited from, and it may be the most important part of fiscal cliff negotiations to most Americans. In fact, whether the country goes over the fiscal cliff or the President caves to Republican demands, working Americans will be hit hardest and it is all down to the GOP’s intransigence on tax increases on the rich that caused S&P to downgrade the nation’s credit, a near credit default, failure of the super-committee, sequestration, and now a dangerous fiscal cliff.



You cannot deny the economic failures of the Republican party. Please, for more information, view another debate I am in: http://www.debate.org... includes a plethora of facts you should be aware of. Now, I am going to ask you a question: If the Republican economics are so great, why do they continually fail to do their duty and to fulfill their obligations? The Republican-controlled states are usually the ones that are poorer and that have more drug cartels and illegal immigrants. This must cease.





Point Two: Social Views

The social views of the Republican party are appalling. I do not need to cite sources for this particular claim. This should be common knowledge. This is common sense; logic. Republicans refuse to acknowledge that same-sex marriage has no issues whatsoever. They refuse to support sophisticated gun control (I have debated that topic. Please view the link for more information: http://www.debate.org...) The Republicans, sadly, do not know how to govern and serve justice.



Point Three: Conservatism in General

Conservatism is, usually, a heinous political ideology. Dictionary.com provides multiple definitions for the term, but the definiton we will utilize is “the disposition to preserve or restore what is established and traditional and to limit change.”We need innovation, growth, and reform. The Republican Party of today fails to deliver this. There was once a time, however, when Republicans were marvelous politicians. This was, however, in the mid-1800s. Today, the party is too radically conservative. With members such as Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and John Boehner, the party is very irresponsible.

I was once a hardcore Liberal, but then I saw the errors in my ways and became a Progressive. A few elements of Liberalism- most importantly reform and innovation - still remain in my political ideology. Neither party is perfect - the Democrats and Republicans - but there is a large difference between the two. Ask yourself: Is Conservatism truly beneficial? I say no. I would like to see you state plenty of evidence favoring Conservatism. I believe you cannot do this, but it is your duty to prove me wrong.




MLA Citations



"Modern." Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. <http://dictionary.reference.com...;.




"Republican." Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. <http://dictionary.reference.com...;.




"If Republican Economics Were So Good, Why Did America Need a Stimulus to Boost Jobs?"PolicyMic. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. <http://www.policymic.com...;.




"Failed Republican Economics Are at the Root of America's Decade of Economic Woe." PoliticusUSA. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. <http://www.politicususa.com...;.




"Conservatism." Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. <http://dictionary.reference.com...;.
msheahan99

Pro

msheahan99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
WilliamsP

Con

My opponent forfeits. I believe I have made sufficient arguments and therfore I will resume arguing once my opponent has given me his main argument. Unless my opponent explains why he forfeited, I urge the voters to not give the "conduct" points to him. Thank you.
msheahan99

Pro

msheahan99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
WilliamsP

Con

My opponent forfeits. I still await his main arguments.
msheahan99

Pro

msheahan99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
WilliamsP

Con

Forfeiture. This is unacceptable.
msheahan99

Pro

msheahan99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
It doesn't seem to tackle the divide at all. This isn't republican vs democrat. This is just a critical analysis of the Republican Party.
Posted by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
Nice. Classic Democrat vs Republican debate. We see microcosms of this all the time, but as far as I can recall this is the first debate I've seen to tackle this divide head on.
Posted by Buggie111 3 years ago
Buggie111
This should be interesting.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
WilliamsPmsheahan99Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments go entirely uncontested. I found Con's sources to be relatively lackluster (half of them were definitions), but because Pro provided absolutely nothing, I think that Con's sources are good enough for points.
Vote Placed by MrJosh 3 years ago
MrJosh
WilliamsPmsheahan99Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for forfeit, Arguments because arguments were made, Sources because sources were given. Cut and dried.