The Instigator
The_brick
Pro (for)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
bigbass3000
Con (against)
Losing
25 Points

The US system of presidential primaries is contrary to democratic values

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
Pro Tied Con
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: 3/10/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,981 times Debate No: 3168
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (15)

 

The_brick

Pro

Resolved:The US system of presidential primaries is contrary to democratic values

1)Delegates are free to switch there moves after the primary

When you vote in a presidential primary or caucus, you are usually voting for a specific candidate, but for another person, called a delegate, who you hope will later support your candidate at the Republican and Democratic National Convention. You can only hope, because many states do not bind delegates to to follow voter intent, especially in the case of a content convention. If no single candidates gets a majority of the delegates on the first vote , then the horse- trading can begin. After the second ballot, most delegates are free to nominate Jared, Yes thetas right the Subway guy for the commercials, if they so choose. The last contest convention occurred in 1984, when Democratic candidate Gary Hart and Jesse JAckson initially refused to yield to Walter Mondale.

This is only my first debate on the website I can provide alot better case time give
bigbass3000

Con

Resolved:The US system of presidential primaries is contrary to democratic values

First off I would say this, superdelegates have nothing to do with the U.S. system of presidential primaries. Why, because super delegates happen at the national convention. primaries elect members to the convention, but super delegates are different. Also in 1984, the delegates sided with the people,and they have never gone against the people. If they did they would be out of a job, but now onto my case.

Presidential Primaries-Of or relating to a president or presidency, A preliminary election in which the registered voters of a political party nominate candidates for office.

Contrary-Opposed, as in character or purpose

Democratic Values-The fundamental beliefs and constitutional principles outlined In the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and other important writings such as U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

Overview: What is a presidential primary is a question to be answered. Both major political parties (Democratic and Republican) officially nominate their candidate for President at their respective national conventions, usually held during the summer before the election. Depending on state law and state party rules, when voters cast ballots for a candidate in a presidential primary, they may actually be voting to award delegates "bound" to vote for a candidate at the state or national convention, or they may simply be expressing an opinion that the state party is not bound to follow in selecting delegates to the national convention.

Con.1 first amendment

On January 16, 2008 the United States Supreme Court ruled a political party has a first amendment right to have a election process that in their view will produce the best nominee for their party. Also they ruled it in favor of federalism as well, which is where a government, particularly are own, is run by a central government, with mini state governments. That is why so many primaries are so different in many ways. The system is not contrary because not every primary that is run is the same; they are all different, with different rules, which make them not contrary. What this means is that a political party has a right to have any primary system it wants. Primaries are not contrary to democratic values because are democratic values are exactly what the Supreme Court does for are nation. So Primaries are not contrary because a political party can have Super Delegates and that would be upholding democratic values.

This will also rebut your contention 1

Super Delegates are Democratic

Super delegates are democratic, because the people voted them in, and they make decisions. Also Super Delegates work for the people's interests, why because they are smarter than us, and were voted to look out for us. Take Jimmy Carter for instance, he has started Habitat for humanity and he is super Delegates. Also as far as someone coming up here and saying they will go against the people is not true. Why, because if they did, it would destroy the party. They have never gone against the people, because they realize, they are the ones who have the power. If they go against that power, they will lose their support and then where would the Democratic Party be. Even when they did decide the winner, they did not go against the people. Super delegates are democratic for one, according to the Supreme Court they are, two they are elected and three, they look for what is best for the people. Also Superdelegates are elected officials who work for the people, if they defy the people; they are going to out of a job. So it will never happen, they will never undermine the vote, unless they are crazy.

Federalism
Federalism is the idea that is in our constitution, that states should have the right to have different ways of running the country. The primaries are a big example of that, the reason, why there are so many different primaries, like the Cajun Primary in New Orleans and the Texas two steps is because States have powers. Federalism is a huge democratic value, because it is even in the name of our government a federal Republic. So Primaries promote states rights.

Con. 4 Equal opportunity for everyone
To spend four months criss-crossing the country meeting voters is a good test of a candidate's strengths and weaknesses, and it gives Americans lots of opportunities to decide which politician they like best. Also, a little-known candidate who does well in the early caucuses or primaries has a chance to attract financial support, and organize a strong campaign. Since the first primaries are smaller states, the way the process works is simple, go from small to big states. This gives every candidate a chance to show its side and gain momentum and voters getting to know them. Presidential primaries are the best for a representative democracy.

Con. 5 before primaries
Before primaries, presidential nominees, were picked by the convention, by themselves, meaning the people really, did not have a say on how will be the nominee. Primaries give the candidates a chance to battle it out for the seat, rather than just be nominated. This is the best way for everyone's voice to be heard, for the people. Primaries work because it gives the people a voice to be heard in the system. By the people having a voice, it really is giving a voice to who will be picked, thus it is an important part of democratic values.

Con.6 Front Loading is good
For all the fretting we heard this past year over the dangers of front-loading the process -- that it would give a leg up to the wealthier, well-known candidates, preventing the slow ascent of sleeper candidates -- well, so far that's just dead wrong. Mitt Romney's millions didn't win him the gold in either of the first few contests -- instead we saw a relative unknown with little funding win Iowa, and a veteran candidate whose political tombstone was all but written this past summer, take New Hampshire. Maybe we weren't giving enough credit to the voters -- who so far have rejected the perceived momentum of the winning candidate coming out of Iowa and now New Hampshire. Now it's looking like this race may go beyond Super Duper Tuesday, and we're even hearing whispers of the forgotten words, "brokered convention" -- something this country hasn't seen since the 1952! This means that at the end, there may not be a winner, which is good, because it proves even though front loading has critics, it is causing a close race on both sides, and doesn't allow the media to proclaim a front runner and thus is good for every candidate.
Debate Round No. 1
The_brick

Pro

Point of clarifaction I'm not talking about superdelegates I'm talking about the GOP and goes for both parties.
So if I can provide that Presidential Primaries go against a few democratic values I will win today's debate see that the Con having talked about superdelegates. This has nothing to do with todays rounds.

I will list a number of democratic values for you:

The Pursuit of Happiness: As long as you don't interfere with others you have the right to seek happiness in your own way.

In caucus I'm not sure which one I can give you the website. A company forced workers to vote for Obama or they would switch there work hours and make it so that they would miss the voting altoghter and/or not be paid for the work they had done that week. This goes agaisnt one democratic value that I have just posted.

Everyone has the right to Political, Legal, Social and Economic Equality. Everyone has the right to the same treatment regardless of race, sex, religion, heritage, or economic status

Mexicans are being turned down because there arent enough translaters and therefore this is taking away from there rights Politically.
bigbass3000

Con

" I'm talking about the GOP and goes for both parties."
"So if I can provide that Presidential Primaries go against a few democratic values I will win today's debate see that the Con having talked about superdelegates.", if that is true, then why did you bring up the Mondale issue, that was in the democratic party, not the GOP. You can't concede to a win, if you don't rebut any of my contentions.

"The Pursuit of Happiness: As long as you don't interfere with others you have the right to seek happiness in your own way.", to clarify, we are talking about the presidential primary system, not the Caucus system. Caucus and primaries are totally different systems. Plus it only strengthens the fact that we are not going to talk about super delegates as you said. The primary system is not the caucus system, you have to see, everyone out there, he is trying to narrow the debate down to caucus, because it is the opnly way, he thinks he can win, however, his arguements are not topical, so disregrad them from the round.

Second he brought up how Mexicans can't vote, because of language issues, but he has provided no evidence to back up his claim and he does not need a translater, if he has a ballot that is in spanish. The primary system does not impend on any values. Also he has dropped my supreme court arguement as well, here is why it stands in the round, the supreme court makes decisions encompassing all democratic values of the U.S., so if they rule a political party has a first amendment right to hold a nomination process it feels will produce the best candidate, then it is not contrary as thee have been no cases against primaries that have proven, to not go against democratic values. Two federalism is still in the round as well. I will drop my super delegate arguement and move on to his RNC arguement, I do not get his arguement, because I already went over, why they will never go against the people. If they do, they will never win the next election for them and the candidate for their party. Even if it is about power, the affirmitive, is basing his arguements on what if's, also known as a slippery slope fallacy. Which is not a concrete example, so it must not stand in the round. You must always look to the negatives democratic values, because it encompases all the democratic values.e.g. the constitution is like a jellyfish, the top part is the constitution and the tentacles are the values.

vote neg, and remenber, we are talking about the presidential primary system, not the caucus system, or the unpledged RNC, which is what I think he is talking about, though he is confusing. Vote Neg
Debate Round No. 2
The_brick

Pro

No were did I state that I was talking about super delegates. So the Con is really confused here. It doesn't say just Democrats. Its says "Democratic values" and this is for both parties, not just the Democrats.

In the second part you state:

Second he brought up how Mexicans can't vote, because of language issues, but he has provided no evidence to back up his claim and he does not need a translator, if he has a ballot that is in spanish.

I would like to focus in on this part mainly because that seems like a racist remark. I'm not spanish but I know people who are "he does not need a translator, if he has a ballot that is in spanish." And plus you think that they are going to have spanish ballot really. My friends Dad is spanish and they didn't have a Spanish Ballot for him he got turned down.

Also Super Delegates work for the people's interests, why because they are smarter than us, and were voted to look out for us. Take Jimmy Carter for instance, he has started Habitat for humanity and he is super Delegates.

Thought you said we were talking about super delegates but on that case it brings me back to my first post.

super delegates can change there vote whenever and for whoever they want to regardless of what people want. Yes your right it would destroy the party that goes against the democratic values. just proved you work again

According to:www.classroomhelp.com
Federalism is not defined anywhere so this is relevant to today's debate.

Con. 4 Equal opportunity for everyone
I just proved this work to with the mexicans

Con. 5 before primaries
Before primaries, presidential nominees, were picked by the convention, by themselves, meaning the people really, did not have a say on how will be the nominee. Primaries give the candidates a chance to battle it out for the seat, rather than just be nominated. This is the best way for everyone voice to be heard, for the people. Primaries work because it gives the people a voice to be heard in the system. By the people having a voice, it really is giving a voice to who will be picked, thus it is an important part of democratic values.

THis whole argument is off topic. The tag for the contention gives it away. BEFORE PRIMARIES . Sense the resolution states :The US system of presidential primaries is contrary to democratic values.
We are not talking about the before we are talking about during. So this must be disregard

Con.6 Front Loading is good
Here is to reasons why front loading is bad

1) The Primaries will turn into "American Idol - The President" - A larger portion of Americans care less about the important issues we all face. Further more many people like I, feel the responsibility to participate by voting, but are sick of the campaign already, and are not taking a close look at what is going on. As a result both parties may end up with nominees that may in fact be un-electable. There may be empty suits or have a closet full of skeletons, but it is quite possible that enough delegates will be assigned early enough that no one gets property examined.

2) The Campaign will drag on F O R E V E R - It has already gone on far too long, and we are likely to see a huge flurry of activity early in the year, followed by the front runners taking pot shots at each other for months and months.

The only hope that I have for this idiotic front loading is that it will happen so rapidly, with so little consideration of the candidates and what kind of president they would make, that no one will have enough delegates to be the nominee on the first convention vote.

I can't say to better myself:"If your not cheating, your not trying"
So if you want a cheating to win this round please vote the NEG. But if you want a true-hearted american boy. Please, Vote AFF, Vote AMERICA
bigbass3000

Con

"Second he brought up how Mexicans can't vote, because of language issues, but he has provided no evidence to back up his claim and he does not need a translator, if he has a ballot that is in spanish." , this is common sense, have you provided evidence, proving your point, it is common sense, that there are spanish ballots.

How am I racist, you posted this,"Mexicans are being turned down because there arent enough translaters and therefore this is taking away from there rights Politically.", their are not enough translaters, you are telling me, they can speak just fine and yet they need translaters. moving on

They will never go against the party, besides, you can never guarantee an abuse will never happen, but that is why we have a checks and balances system. The last check is the people.

Federalism is the main idea of are government of the U.S. , not every state has the same laws as everyone else, it's common sense, it is relevant, because that is are government structure.

Con.4, has nothing to do with Mexicans not voting, it goes into depths with why, candidates have a equal chance.

"THis whole argument is off topic. The tag for the contention gives it away. BEFORE PRIMARIES . Sense the resolution states :The US system of presidential primaries is contrary to democratic values.
We are not talking about the before we are talking about during. So this must be disregard", This arguement proves, back then, it was democratic and now it is even more democratic

"1) The Primaries will turn into "American Idol - The President" - A larger portion of Americans care less about the important issues we all face. Further more many people like I, feel the responsibility to participate by voting, but are sick of the campaign already, and are not taking a close look at what is going on. As a result both parties may end up with nominees that may in fact be un-electable. There may be empty suits or have a closet full of skeletons, but it is quite possible that enough delegates will be assigned early enough that no one gets property examined.", That is what a democracy is a popularity contest, for one.

"2) The Campaign will drag on F O R E V E R - It has already gone on far too long, and we are likely to see a huge flurry of activity early in the year, followed by the front runners taking pot shots at each other for months and months.", This is rebutted, because the reason it goes on forever is to give the people a meaningful choice, this rebuts his first point, saying it is a presidency, then he says, it should be quick. His points 1 nd 2 contradict each other.

I am note cheating and besides, you concede to the supreme court arguement, so Neg, wins, two, he drops my caucus arguement, so I win on that point as well.
Vote Neg, look and read everything, I have won, this debate is over, he needs to stop losing. He agrees, with virtually, my whole case.
Debate Round No. 3
The_brick

Pro

THE NEG SHOULD LOST FOR ONE REASON I'M MEXICAN AND MY DAD CAN SPEAK ENGLISH AND WE WAS TURN DOWN WHEN WE WENT TO VOTE AND THE NEG IS BEING RACIST TOWARDS ME.

I am note cheating and besides

BESIDES HE NOTES THAT HE IS CHEATING IN TODAY'S DEBATE AND CHEATING IS UNEXPETABLE.

Let me post my really case and you would get worked. I've been to nationals as a freshman
bigbass3000

Con

First off, you say that because you went to nationals as a freshman, you win. No, you don't, I wasn't trying to be racist, you posted a arguement saying , mexicans are discouraged because there are not enough translaters, that is what you said. Don't cheat in this round. The quote is cheating is trying, I am not trying in this debate, all of my arguements stand, he has not rebutted the caucus system, super delegates, supreme court. I embody all democratic values wioth the supreme court, the supreme court rules, the system is not contrary, then it isn't. Come up with something original.

Your dad was turned down, you said it was because of translaters, you said that. Two, post your real case, I will tear it to pieces. YOU are a arrogant debater, I'VE BEEN TO NATIONALS, yea ha. So, what jsut because you have went, doesn't make you god of debate. Did you win Nationals, no, so how can you call yourself a expert. Post your real case, do it, because even a good debater can win rounds, even if the opponent already knows about his case. NEG wins, vote now.
Debate Round No. 4
The_brick

Pro

What we really to look at this people eho have a life which you don't have. Grow up and do something with your life get a job.

Vote AFF
bigbass3000

Con

Whoa, vote neg, because my opponent is acting like a god. Seriously, he is writing that, because he can't come up with anything logical to say.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by bigbass3000 9 years ago
bigbass3000
Post your real case, I will challenge it and beat it. No case is unbeatable.
Posted by Shorack 9 years ago
Shorack
Seems to me that debate.org is attracting ego. :')

i'm reading it quite regulary now, in profiles mainly (where it is no such a big deal i guess), but sometimes in debates too: i've been to discussion stuff X. I'm in debate team Y. I want to point out that i've got debating experience from Z.

...
Posted by theantianarchy 9 years ago
theantianarchy
Excellent debate, gentlemen. Props to the guts to debate this online. Debate on, Mates.
Posted by The_brick 9 years ago
The_brick
Oh well I do want to post my real case people will get ahlod of it
Posted by zakkuchan 9 years ago
zakkuchan
I'm going to be at the state tournament too, but in LD.
Posted by The_brick 9 years ago
The_brick
Colorado.... I'm just trying to run a little something something before state. Maybe create my back up case for NFL qual
Posted by zakkuchan 9 years ago
zakkuchan
Wow! Someone else from Colorado! And not just Colorado, but the grand valley. :P It doesn't seem possible.

As for this debate: I'd take it, but I'd be too tempted just to point out all of the many different things in America that are "contrary to democratic values". Unless you had specified that we were talking about American democratic values, in which case I would gladly take this.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by tmhustler 7 years ago
tmhustler
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by thejudgeisgod 7 years ago
thejudgeisgod
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:07 
Vote Placed by betsythebrave 8 years ago
betsythebrave
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Creator 9 years ago
Creator
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by aodanu16 9 years ago
aodanu16
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by twinkiesunite 9 years ago
twinkiesunite
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by rnsweetswimn1 9 years ago
rnsweetswimn1
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by astrosfan 9 years ago
astrosfan
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by rnsweetheart 9 years ago
rnsweetheart
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by The_brick 9 years ago
The_brick
The_brickbigbass3000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30