The Instigator
DeATHNOTE
Pro (for)
Losing
57 Points
The Contender
VantagePoint
Con (against)
Winning
79 Points

The elections that are occuring in 08 are fixed against ron paul

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: 1/9/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,254 times Debate No: 1570
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (24)
Votes (44)

 

DeATHNOTE

Pro

ok, with all the publicity that is coming for Ron Paul there is no way he keeps placing in 5th place for all of them. the people that are coming in places higher than him are more likely to be the ones coming in lower places than him.

My next point brings me to the different ways that the balletts are taken. the hand voting balletts are more likely to be accurate because there are wittnesses counting every single one. sure there is human error to take into consideration but there is only going to be a very small percentage that is error, this is because these are trained professionals.

the computerized ballotts are the ones that are going to be inaccurate. some people dont realize how easy it is to hack into one of the computers and give a candidate some extra votes. i conspirthize that the govermnent dosent want ron paul to become the next president so they are hacking in and giving some of the other candidates votes, or just taking some away from ron paul. this is why we need people to do the same but in favor of ron paul

LETS GO!!! RON PAUL R[EVOL]UTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
VantagePoint

Con

Publicity and popularity do not correlate with the number of voters that will actually go to the polls. The majority of Ron Paul's fan base is college and high school kids - many of who can not even vote yet, or do not care enough more than to put a bumper sticker on their dorm room door, and yell "LETS GO!!! RON PAUL R[EVOL]UTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" around campus. Ron Paul is a fad to these kids, because of his liberal ideas about drug policy and such. He does not draw in as large amount of serious party voters as you may think, because his liberal views conflict with his Republican party affiliation.

"the people that are coming in places higher than him are more likely to be the ones coming in lower places than him."

I will not refute this, as the claim "more likely" is an opinion and is not supported by factual evidence. Please provide some statistics that show the likelihood of other candidates scoring lower in the polls than Ron Paul.

Also, the "trained professionals" that count the ballots are actually regular people off the street who are typically paid about $6.00 an hour for their work for the day. Not that this is entirely relevant, but just a note.

I assume that by "fixed", you mean rigged. The elections are most certainly not rigged against one particular candidate by the current administration. I do not deny that the government has the capability to do so, but in this case there is no motive. I would understand the suspicion if Bush were running for re-election, as we have seen Watergate and similar situations in the past, but as Bush is ending his final term, his administration would have no reason to sabotage Ron Paul's campaign. Additionally, Ron Paul is a Republican. If the government were to "hack in and giving some of the other candidates votes, or just taking some away from him", don't you think they would target a Democratic candidate? Parties tend to like to continue thier political legacy, if you will.

I look forward to your response.
Debate Round No. 1
DeATHNOTE

Pro

you see vantagepoint, you clearly state that all that is ron paul is that he is clearly a fad. for what i have seen at my school, i agree with you in that. but in your argument you dont argue the main point of my argument. and that is that there is a possibility that the elections may be fixed against ron paul or one of the other candidates. with all that goes on with politics there is many possibilities that an election can be either fixed against one of the opponents. my example of this is how ron paul has placed in some of the recent primary elections. in some of the states he should have placed in 4th, and there was once a chance he could have come in 3rd but some of them. but 5th place and 7th place are relalistic for how you say that he is a fad. but with how popular he is in some states, there is possibilities that the electronic computer ballotts can be fixed against a candidate because of poltics being scared they might not get the votes they should be. all i am saying in a nutshell is that the elections that go on today can be fixed against some one.

i apoligize if you did not understand my previous argument, i didnt have much time to write it.
- i look forward to your rebuttle

sincerly,
DeATHNOTE
VantagePoint

Con

Actually, I did refute your main argument in my final paragraph. Here it is again:

"I assume that by "fixed", you mean rigged. The elections are most certainly not rigged against one particular candidate by the current administration. I do not deny that the government has the capability to do so, but in this case there is no motive. I would understand the suspicion if Bush were running for re-election, as we have seen Watergate and similar situations in the past, but as Bush is ending his final term, his administration would have no reason to sabotage Ron Paul's campaign. Additionally, Ron Paul is a Republican. If the government were to "hack in and giving some of the other candidates votes, or just taking some away from him", don't you think they would target a Democratic candidate? Parties tend to like to continue their political legacy, if you will."

I am not naive enough to believe that there is no deception in politics or even manipulations during the voting process. I just don't agree with your original argument: that the current administration is targeting Ron Paul, or attempting to sabotage his campaign, and I give my reasons why in the paragraph above. Even assuming that you're right, the government wouldn't risk being caught manipulating numbers of votes on just primaries. Also, your friend that helped you with information cited an incident in which human error was the huge factor. As you originally stated that "there is human error to take into consideration but there is only going to be a very small percentage that is error", and you were shown to be wrong, I cannot see how I can trust the rest of your argument - I don't know how much is a guess or just made up.
Debate Round No. 2
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by BarHarbor 6 years ago
BarHarbor
I am a huge Ron Paul supporter and I agree with VantagePoint. Voters should not confuse voting for VantagePoint with voting against Ron Paul - rather, you are voting in opposition to ridiculous conspiracy theories.
Posted by l2jperry 6 years ago
l2jperry
That's Murdoch for you.

Anyway, Libertarians in the U.S. used to refer to themselves as "Liberals," but then the name was hijacked for people who favor large government. That is when they started referring to themselves as "Classical Liberals." and now they just refer to themselves as libertarians. I agree though, the labels are seriously flawed.
Posted by andrewfcarling 6 years ago
andrewfcarling
Sorry bout all the typos. I need an editor.
Posted by andrewfcarling 6 years ago
andrewfcarling
Did anyone see the South Carolina Debate? The camera was (in my opinion) deliberately shaking whenever Ron Paul spoke. When he makes a good point and the audience responds, the camera will never show anyone in perticular clapping or showing approval. Just a wide pan of the stage or a strait faced audience member. The debate was quickley followed by a obviously staged group discussion regaurding how well Fred Thompson did. Then closing with the entire room abrupting their disaproval of Ron Paul. Fox News once again manipulated their media in order to pursuede the public to side with whatever the producers are told to preach. Ron Paul deserves and equal chance to speak to America through a steady camera on a tri-pod.
Posted by AREA 6 years ago
AREA
labels such as liberal get used in many ways.
According to the economist, in France, a Liberal is someone something of an ultranationalist who opposes the existence of government. In the US, it tends to mean someone who wants a large government that can give people freedom from one another by equalizing their power so that they cannot exploit one another.

Conservative means conserving (selected) "traditions" (real or imagined), but not nature.

Many "Liberals" in the US are "rightists" economically, but socially left "Left".
Do these labels make sense?
If not, then attempts to see everything on a single spectrum of left to right or conservative to liberal make little sense. Thus, our use of words which imply such a 2 dimensional spectrum could be misleading.
Posted by DeATHNOTE 6 years ago
DeATHNOTE
Dude the only thing going for michigan right now is ron paul thats why we need him, think of all the poor ppl in michigan that need his help
Posted by DeATHNOTE 6 years ago
DeATHNOTE
yeah and look at l2jperrys pic, he met ron paul, he would know......Yeah
Posted by l2jperry 6 years ago
l2jperry
Being a libertarian does not necessarily mean that you are pro-choice, many libertarians divide on this topic. Look it up.
Posted by DeATHNOTE 6 years ago
DeATHNOTE
Page 2 of comments, l2jperry has sorces that show the election is rigged against him
Posted by attrition 6 years ago
attrition
Ron Paul is Libertarian. That means he holds both views that a 'liberal' or a conservative might have. He just runs as a republican because Democrats are more socialist.

His stance on guns is completely black and white with no thought as to the gravity of modern day gun ownership ie. assault weapons, large caliber handguns, fully automatic weaponry, even explosives etc.

What exactly is meant by ARMS. The second amendment states; A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The bill of rights was written September 25, 1789. Personal Weaponry during this time were essentially single shot muskets. The American forefathers couldn't have foreseen the advancement of modern day weaponry. Ron Paul advocates absolutely no regulation and even promots on his website the rights of the mentally ill to be able to carry weaponry.

Also, I can't see how person with Libertarian views can be against the freedom of a woman to have the choice to have an abortion or not.

The elections aren't fixed against Ron Paul. Dr. Paul has done a good job of fixing the elections against himself.
44 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by cbass28 4 years ago
cbass28
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by inrainbows 6 years ago
inrainbows
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 BarHarbor 6 years ago
BarHarbor
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 txgopkid 6 years ago
txgopkid
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 pmagyar 6 years ago
pmagyar
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 Bradendude92 6 years ago
Bradendude92
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 A-ROD 6 years ago
A-ROD
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 richguy_69 6 years ago
richguy_69
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 SlimRusek 6 years ago
SlimRusek
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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 LandonWalsh 6 years ago
LandonWalsh
DeATHNOTEVantagePointTied
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