The Instigator
TheKlearDebateur
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Gibby97
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Was Richard Nixon a good president besides Watergate?

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 1 vote the winner is...
Gibby97
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/25/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 638 times Debate No: 75747
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

TheKlearDebateur

Pro

I think that if you remove the Watergate episode from Nixon's career, he could be considered a somewhat decent president.
Gibby97

Con

Had Watergate not occurred, Nixon would not have been a good President, but a Great one, arguably top 5 of all time. Nixon opened the door to Communist China, and was ending the Vietnam War. Nixon also completing his entire second term would've caused Gerald Ford never to become President meaning he never pardons Nixon costing the GOP the 1976 election, and Carter never gets elected. Again even before Watergate Nixon was a great and underrated President.
Debate Round No. 1
TheKlearDebateur

Pro

TheKlearDebateur forfeited this round.
Gibby97

Con

Nixon would've been great not good for the reasons I just mentioned. He is not because Watergate tarnished his legacy.
Debate Round No. 2
TheKlearDebateur

Pro

TheKlearDebateur forfeited this round.
Gibby97

Con

Nixon would've been great not good for the reasons I just mentioned. He is not because Watergate tarnished his legacy.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by drew459 1 year ago
drew459
Nixon was awful even if watergate hadn't occurred, he pulled out of Vietnam way to early and that is the reason the South Lost the war.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
TheKlearDebateurGibby97Tied
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: Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited the majority of the debate, which is rarely considered acceptable conduct in any debate setting. Thus, I award conduct to Con. S&G - Tie. Both sides maintained adequate spelling and grammar. Thus, S&G is tied. Arguments - Tie. Con seemed to differentiate between "good" and "great", which is seemingly incoherent and poorly conveyed. Pro made absolutely no arguments and forfeited the majority of the debate, thus hindering their ability to rebut Con. Thus, arguments are tied. Sources - Tie. Neither side utilized any citations or references. Thus, conduct to Con. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.