The Instigator
Mcscrewdriver97
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
calculatedr1sk
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

The Republican Party's platform is overall superior to that of the Democratic Party

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 3 votes the winner is...
calculatedr1sk
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/25/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,154 times Debate No: 35071
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Mcscrewdriver97

Pro

I would like to argue that the Republican party's platform is superior to that of the Democratic Party. R1 is for acceptance, R2 is for openings, R3 is for rebuttals, and R4 is for closing argument, no trolling please, and be respectful.
calculatedr1sk

Con

I accept! Good luck to you, sir.
Debate Round No. 1
Mcscrewdriver97

Pro

To start I will give a quick summary of the GOP's platform:
-Simplify the tax system through a 20% across the board tax cut, an elimination of taxes on interest and dividend for the middle class, and an end to the death tax. Along with this the GOP supports a reduction of our corporate gains tax rate.
-The GOP supports a balanced budget amendment to prevent out of control spending
-They support the repeal of Obamacare
-They want to make the people more self reliant, and less reliant on government benefits
-They want to revive the housing market by encouraging investments from the free enterprise
-They also purpose a public and private sector team-up to help rebuild our infrastructure
-They are against judges using their position to further their political ideals
-They promise to protect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights
-They support the use of our own natural resources to gain energy independence
-They promise to end the fight against the coal industry and rollback some of the regulations that prevent off-shore drilling, along with supporting the Keystone XL pipeline
-The GOP supports hydrofracking
-they support conservations and national parks
-They want to reduce the EPA's power and excessive regulations
-They support Medicare and Medicaid reform
-They support the reform of the entitlement and welfare system in order to make Americans self sufficient
-They support traditional marriage

This is a platform that allows America to return to the success of it's younger days, and most importantly revitalize the economy. How? Well that is a simple question to answer, first we will start with the tax cuts. Tax cuts, especially the 20% across the board tax cuts proposed by the republicans 2012 platform, are the ultimate in economic stimulus. It allows everyone to keep a significantly larger part of their weekly paycheck, and when people have more money what they do with it is spend. The increase in revenue for will allow people to buy more consumer goods thus propelling profits and the economy forward. Corporations and small businesses alike will be making more money, and when these businesses have a larger profit they are more likely to put that money towards expansion, and with expansion means more job openings, which creates room for more and more of the unemployed to become employed. Democrats will argue that tax cuts for all people put a burden on the middle class, but this can't be true when these tax cuts help the middle class just as much if not more than the rich. These accusations that an across the board tax cut hurts the middle class are nothing more than class warfare.

The Republican Party also is in favor of rolling back regulations and welfare programs two things the Democratic party is in favor of expanding. Democrats argue the government must fund clean energy, and the best way to do this in there minds is... You guessed it! Regulations and overspending. While needlessly fighting and trying to destroy our fracking and coal industries the government has put massive funds into wind and other alternative sources which have been nearly completely ineffective. Republicans propose deregulation to free up the market and to allow us to use coal plants and hydrofracking to boost our energy independence and economy. Along with this Republicans support the Keystone XL pipeline which would be a major boost to our economy.

The Republican Party also supports our constitution, they support our economy, and they support the people. Unlike the democrats they want to rollback government benefits so people can WANT to get back in the job market, and see that freedom is better than being reliant on the government for your next meal or paycheck. They want to create and environment where it is possible for all people to succeed and be independent from big government.

www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home
www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform
calculatedr1sk

Con

Thank you for that opening argument, Pro, and thank you readers for your interest. I’d like to begin my opening statements with a few general comments about American politics. It may surprise you to know that I myself am a card carrying Republican, leaning towards libertarianism. In recent years though, I find myself with little choice but to vote Democrat on most issues. I greatly admire the leadership of moderate Republicans like Jeb Bush and Charlie Crist, both of whom I remember fondly for their capable stewardship over my beloved home state. What has troubled me about the party in recent years is what I consider to be a preoccupation with reliving past glories, rather than charting the course ahead. In particular I find the GOP’s obsessive hatred of Obama to be truly ugly, and frighteningly successful. The most up to date study I’ve heard on the matter is that 35% of New Jersey conservatives believe our President may be the Antichrist [1]. The party platform itself may not directly use such inflammatory language, of course, but it pays the extreme Christian Right a nod by placing such high priority on things like “protect traditional marriage”.

Until the GOP openly and unequivocally follows Obama’s courageous example on the issue of gay rights, they will remain on the wrong side of history. To our children, opponents of gay marriage and opponents to military service by homosexual soldiers will look no different than the bigots who rallied to keep blacks and whites from being able to marry. [2]

The biggest problem with the platform overall is probably taxes. You can’t cut taxes and immediately see enough growth to cover the shortfall, that’s just pure fantasy. Nominal tax revenue is almost always increasing, regardless of tax policy, due to inflation. But real tax revenue tends to increase with tax increases, and decrease with tax cuts. Period. [3] The only cases where tax cuts increase revenues are if rates are already extremely high (as in close to 100%). Additionally, if tax reform is to remain revenue neutral, this merely means that the rich will enjoy lower rates, and the poor and middle classes will have to make up the difference.

Although I don’t have space to counter GOP attitudes about unemployment compensation and welfare in this round, I want to assure readers that I disagree with Republicans, and will elaborate on this in future rounds.

On energy, Democrats have supported sustainability and renewables in favor of fossil fuels. So far there has been no commercially viable breakthrough that has revolutionized energy consumption for the majority of Americans, but we all know that eventually there will be one, and it needs to be developed here if America is to be at the forefront of the industry (and we do). Fossil fuels will run out. Therefore, to try to dig our way out rather than innovate our way out is procrastination. It is a potentially catastrophic one as well, because despite GOP denial of climate change and human involvement in it, 97% of climatologists and virtually every scientific organization studying the topic agree that humans are causing it [4].

Much of the rest of the platform (for both parties) is just obvious and noncontroversial. Things like honoring our veterans, giving our children a great education, promoting self-reliance, and defending the constitution are largely universal values. I petition voters not to count such things as favoring either one side or the other. If readers would like me to identify exactly which of Pro’s items I take issue with, and which ones I see as being non-differential between the parties, I would be glad to do so more explicitly, but I do ask that in future rounds Pro use a numbering system for his lists.

1)

2) http://weknowmemes.com...

3) http://www.salon.com...

4) http://en.wikipedia.org...

Debate Round No. 2
Mcscrewdriver97

Pro

R1:'The party platform itself may not directly use such inflammatory language, of course, but it pays the extreme Christian Right a nod by placing such high priority on things like “protect traditional marriage”.'

Thanks to Con for an interesting opening argument, I'd like to start right away with this idea of the GOP paying homage to the "extreme Christian Right". While I do agree that "protecting traditional marriage" shouldn't be a high priority issue, some of the ideals the social conservatives put forward are positive ones. Ideas such as family values, the idea that no institution can raise a child better than a mother or father, and even a pro-life stance (excluding cases of rape) are fundamentally good ideals to put forward to the American people.

R2:"The biggest problem with the platform overall is probably taxes. You can’t cut taxes and immediately see enough growth to cover the shortfall, that’s just pure fantasy....Additionally, if tax reform is to remain revenue neutral, this merely means that the rich will enjoy lower rates, and the poor and middle classes will have to make up the difference."

Actually as history has shown tax cuts are one of the best ways to get an economy rolling, look at the presidency of Ronald Reagan. The US economy had a bigger boom in the Reagan years than any time before, or since primarily due to the tax cuts. [1] In order to cover this shortfall in revenue, which my opponent speaks of, the GOP is in favor of reducing government spending, so that way there will not be a shortfall or a need for more tax revenue. The repeal of Obamacare and the rolling back of costly social programs and regulations create an avenue for tax cuts, which stimulate the economy. Along with that I'd also like to counter my opponents claim that the middle class would see an increase in tax rates, this is simply untrue as the GOP's plan calls for an across the board tax cut for ALL people. Just because the rich get their rates cut does not mean the middle class sees a rise in rates.

R3:"On energy, Democrats have supported sustainability and renewables in favor of fossil fuels. So far there has been no commercially viable breakthrough that has revolutionized energy consumption for the majority of Americans, but we all know that eventually there will be one, and it needs to be developed here if America is to be at the forefront of the industry (and we do). Fossil fuels will run out"

We all know fossil fuels will run out but right now we have to look at things realistically, the American economy is struggling, unemployment is high, now is not the time to attack our major, dependable and sustainable energy industries (coal, oil, natural gas etc.) To go along with this point, there is a major issue which you failed to address with these renewable energy sources. Take solar and wind for example, they can only work during certain times of the day, they are extremely costly, and very inefficient. [2] A far cry from the sustainable renewable resources the Democrats tout. I am not saying innovation is bad, but we can't abandon the industries we have that work for wasteful and inefficient ones especially with our economy being in its current condition.


1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
2. http://exploringgreentechnology.com...
calculatedr1sk

Con

Family

Years of research has shown convincingly that a loving, two-parent home gives children a considerable advantage in life – regardless of whether or not it is “traditional”. Gay couples who adopt can surely do a better job of providing a loving home for orphans than the government can [5]. Traditional marriage - like the kind the Obamas have, for example - needs no “protection”; everyone supports it. Gay families, however, are constantly under threat from the right, while Democrats are advocating the correct platform.

I again won’t have time to spend much time talking about social programs, except to say that things like unemployment, disability support, and disaster support help all families to stay together when they fall on hard times, and are thus not a waste.

Military

Homosexual soldiers deserve exactly the same respect and appreciation that heterosexual soldiers do. Period. No more, and no less. The Right’s hostility to the gay men and women who defend our country is nothing short of shameful.

Also, the United States is responsible for about 40% of the world’s overall military expenditure, far more than any other country, and more than the next ten countries combined, most of them allies [6]. There are no powerful totalitarian empires left. The weapons used to wage war against other nations are thus less in need than they once were. We do still need some battleships and submarines to stay on top, but not as many. Terrorism is the big threat today, and one generally doesn’t use submarines to beat terrorists. What you do need more of are things like drones and cyberdefense; lower cost and higher effectiveness security solutions.

Taxes/Class

Pro ought to finish a story before he starts to cheer at a happy ending. From his own Wikipedia source:

“Spending during Reagan's two terms (FY 1981–88) averaged 22.4% GDP, well above the 20.6% GDP average from 1971 to 2009. In addition, the public debt rose from 26% GDP in 1980 to 41% GDP by 1988. In dollar terms, the public debt rose from $712 billion in 1980 to $2,052 billion in 1988, a roughly three-fold increase.”

Supporters [of Reaganomics] pointed to the drop in poverty by the end of his term to validate that the tax cuts did indeed trickle down to the poor; opponents noted that the rate quickly shot up even higher in the first year of his successor's term, implying that the full effect of Reagan's policies led to a net increase in poverty.” [7]

Contrast this with the budget surplus left by Clinton - a hard won surplus which his Republican successor quickly squandered with the exact same strategy Republicans still advocate: tax cuts primarily given to the rich. What didn’t work for either Reagan or Bush is going to balance the budget? No, it won’t. I say again - pure fantasy.

Energy

Simple question: who is the country better off giving the support of subsidies and tax credits to – fledgling alternative/sustainable energy firms, or well established big oil? Democrats say the former, Republicans (their treasury filled with oil-stained donations) advocate the latter. Neither party plans to eliminate coal or oil outright, but why do those industries deserve special treatment, especially in light of the climate change argument which my opponent completely dropped?

As it so happens, there have recently been massive advances in battery technology, and the cost to produce solar energy continues to drop about 7% each year [8] [9]. The days of fossil fuels are numbered. Why frack the environment more than we have to just to get a few more years of being screwed at the pump?

5) http://www.reuters.com...

6) http://en.wikipedia.org...

7) http://en.wikipedia.org...

8) http://popularlogistics.com...

Debate Round No. 3
Mcscrewdriver97

Pro

Mcscrewdriver97 forfeited this round.
calculatedr1sk

Con

I want to extend Pro, and all other Americans, a happy Fourth of July. Extend all arguments. As Pro FF'd, I urge a vote for Con.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by BrandonButterworth 3 years ago
BrandonButterworth
Mcscrewdriver97calculatedr1skTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit
Vote Placed by Sargon 3 years ago
Sargon
Mcscrewdriver97calculatedr1skTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by GOP 3 years ago
GOP
Mcscrewdriver97calculatedr1skTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: F.F