The Instigator
MadCatTB
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SJM
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

We Should Beat Donald Trump Supporters

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
SJM
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/16/2016 Category: Arts
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 667 times Debate No: 92789
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

MadCatTB

Pro

Donald Trump supporters should be viciously beaten, because they are obnoxious and despicable people. I put this under the category of "Arts," because I hope that beating Trump supporters will one day develop into a performance art. There will be five rounds to this debate and if you accept you will be arguing against the proposition that Donald Trump supporters should be viciously beaten on sight.
SJM

Con

My opponent says that trump should supporters should be viciously beaten because they are obnoxious and despicable. My opponent is saying that because he has a negative opinion about them that they should get beaten. If this type of view, that we should be able to beat whoever we want is justified, then the whole world would be in chaos.

I find that if you want Donald Trumps supporters to not portray negative qualities, then you shouldn't portray themselves because not only are you portraying them yourself which makes you just as bad, but you're not being an example for people to follow.
Debate Round No. 1
MadCatTB

Pro

My opponent assumes that I believe that Trump supporters are obnoxious and despicable because I have a negative opinion of them. My opponent then proceeds to argue that the world would descend into chaos, because anyone would be able to beat whoever they wanted to. In other words, my opponent is assuming that Trump supporters are not objectively obnoxious and despicable.

Trump supporters are objectively despicable and obnoxious. Watch this video where a Trump supporters is pelted with eggs. Even thought she is getting assaulted and mobbed, she still looks obnoxious and disgusting. Also, this is hilarious and is another reason why we should viciously beat Trump supporters: hilarious Youtube videos.

https://www.youtube.com...
SJM

Con

My opponent fails to know what objective means. The trump supporters I would assume don't think of themselves as such. Objective means that it is something for everyone. Objective means "(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts. This is clearly influenced by opinion since opinion means "a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." That video does not mean that it's objective that trump supporters are obnoxious, no matter how many people say so. Thus, my argument has not been refuted.
If we let people fight trump supporters because of their beliefs, we are teaching people not to be tolerant of other people's beliefs.

Source- Google definitions.
Debate Round No. 2
MadCatTB

Pro

Objective can mean whatever I want it to mean. You did not challenge my point about Trump supporter beatings producing funny videos, therefore you have conceded that point. Now, when I say objective I mean the following: "That which a reasonable person, determined by myself, would consider to be true about something." Therefore, objectively speaking, the before mentioned video demonstrates the despicable and obnoxious nature of Trump supporters. I define opinion as "a view or judgment formed by someone that disagrees with me."

I see that you used Google for your definitions, but we all know that a search on Google will generate thousands of answers to a single question. I can type objective into the search bar and, if I look long enough, I can find a source that defines it in a way that contradicts your definition. Therefore, Google is not a reliable source.

Furthermore, beating Trump supporters has never been about facts; beating Trump supporters has always been about feelings. I feel that Trump supporters should be beaten viciously. In addition to this, I feel that anyone that reports this debate is a secret Trump supporter. Secret Trump supporters will be administered special "secret" beatings.
SJM

Con

No objective can not mean what you want it to mean, because that's the exact opposite definition. I am not worried because the voters will agree with what I have said. Now whether it is funny, yes I have conceded because maybe I spend 23 hours a day watching Trump videos and laughing, but thats besides the point. And to say Trump is by nature something, is a fallacy.

Yes I used google for my definition because you have provided no other, therefore my definition still stands. And yes I know it's about feelings which makes it not objective.
Debate Round No. 3
MadCatTB

Pro

You're missing the point though. I don't have to show that Trump supporters are objectively obnoxious and despicable. Feeling that they are obnoxious and despicable is enough! It's like Obama said after he won the 2008 Presidential Election: "Sometimes you have to smack a bitch."

Also, please note that my opponent thinks a Trump supporter getting assaulted is funny. He would not think it's funny if he did not agree with me that Trump supporters are obnoxious and despicable.
SJM

Con

And as I said earlier, feelings is not enough because then anyone can beat anyone which is not what we should strive for if we want a better life. And that's not necessarily true, maybe I like innocent people getting pelted with things. And my opponent has conceded they aren't objectively obnoxious and despicable.

I made some arguments earlier why it was wrong to beat them because of opinions and he responded with them being objectively worthy of getting beaten which is how we got here. And like I said, he conceded it.
Debate Round No. 4
MadCatTB

Pro

You never challenged my definition of objective though, which means that you conceded to it. I win.

This was a good debate, I thank my opponent for his time and invite him to a session of Trump supporter beating once I win this debate.
SJM

Con

I did not concede the definition because I provided a definition with a source, and you gave a definition you made up which is biased. This was a good debate, I thank my opponent for his time and invite him to a session of peace and meditation.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by CraftyMiscreant 1 year ago
CraftyMiscreant
Why do people want to report this debate? It's a debate. It's a marketplace of ideas and one of the best ways to arrive at conclusions.
Posted by 42lifeuniverseverything 1 year ago
42lifeuniverseverything
Also I just reported the debate.

Deal with it.

42
Posted by 42lifeuniverseverything 1 year ago
42lifeuniverseverything
RFD:

MadCatTB, you need to lose this debate.

When you roll up into a debate website, and claim that your opinion is all that matters, know that you are trying to opinion steam roll many logical people. So if you claim objective is a definition of "Now, when I say objective I mean the following: "That which a reasonable person, determined by myself, would consider to be true about something."' Then you can go f yourself. Because no one here wants to listen to that. You cannot determine the definition of objective because you do not work for the dictionary. Because I do not see any legitimate reason for Trump supporters to be beaten, I VOTE CON.
Posted by TheWorldIsComplicated 1 year ago
TheWorldIsComplicated
Report this debate and have it taken down...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by BenJWasson 1 year ago
BenJWasson
MadCatTBSJMTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 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: Pro didn't use any sources besides a youtube video of a trump support getting beaten. Pro used a false definition of objective. Con made the convincing arguments of free speech and belief as well as helping trump supports be less violent (if they are already) instead of becoming violent with them. Well done.
Vote Placed by 42lifeuniverseverything 1 year ago
42lifeuniverseverything
MadCatTBSJMTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments. Vote Mods don't take it down because I am trying to prove a point with this vote. Thanks.