The Instigator
xsweetlove
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Bitz
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Who should McCain's Vice Presidential candidate be?

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: 5/11/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,580 times Debate No: 3987
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (6)

 

xsweetlove

Pro

I think Sarah Palin should be McCain's running mate. She has a fairly conservative voting record. Also, she has some of the highest approval rates as she is the current sitting governor of Alaska.
Bitz

Con

I will be debating this topic from McCain's perspective, and what he needs to win the general election. Some may argue that McCain needs a conservative to win the red states. I disagree. The red states, such as TX, OK, KS..ect. As well as the conservatives in other states will vote for John McCain even though he is a moderate, it's simple logic: Do you want to get 50% of what you want, or do you want to not vote/vote Obama and get 0% of what you want. McCain doesn't need a conservative, besides, not many people know who Sarah Palin is anyway.

The Vice President that John McCain needs is one that will help him swing purple states red, and even some blue states red in the general election. Therefore, the vice president John McCain needs is none other than Hillary Clinton.

Everyone knows Hillary is going to lose the democratic primary anyway (she needs ~328 delegates, and obama only needs ~160), and since she's such a lying phony that will do anything for power, she should tag-team with McCain. It would definitely set her up for the presidency in 2012. You may be wondering, would Clinton, really betray her party and run with a Republican against Obama? The answer to this is: "With the Clintons, ANYTHING is possible" (1). Have a look at this:

http://raypride.blogspot.com...

"Look at the Super delegate tally. All the Power Players are on her side, all the first termers are on Obama's side. So, should she remain loyal to a party that blatantly stabbed her in the back, or take the Power players with her in an unholy alliance with McCain? Is her personal aspirations to be President more important to her than a party that threw her under the bus?"(1) Of course it is! Hillary is not about supporting the Democratic party, she's about becoming president, and this "unholy alliance" will give her that opportunity after McCain's term.

Some of you may also be wondering: Would McCain really accept Hillary Clinton as a VP? The answer is McCain would be foolish not to, she brings half the democratic vote with her!

Consider this: When Clinton went up against Obama in New York and California, two very big wins for the general election, she won in California with 2,306,361 votes, and McCain won on the republican side with 1,093,560 votes. Obama only got 1,890,026 votes. In New York, Clinton dominated Obama with 1,003,623 votes in comparison to Obama's 697,914 votes. McCain got 310,814 votes on the republican side. The point is clear, with Clinton on her side; McCain may just do the impossible: McCain will actually give the republicans not only wins in the red states and purple states, but may also turn NY and CA, as well as other blue states red!

Most conservatives and republicans will not be too happy about Clinton being McCain's VP. Granted, they will be upset, but eventually common sense will kick in: as liberal as Clinton is, she is not nearly as liberal as Obama, and thus, McCain will win their votes as well. The fact of the matter is: McCain/Clinton will probably rip both parties apart, especially on the democratic side. The resulting division will make McCain/Clinton the strongest ticket, in quite possibly the most interesting election in history.

In Blue states, Republicans don't vote for one main reason: Their votes don't count for anything (they ALWAYS end up blue states anyways), however with Hillary on the Republican side, the voting won't be so one-sided anymore. Republicans will put their vote to good use with the knowledge that they can actually sway the vote, as well as the Hillary-Supporting Democrats. Indeed with the support of her team of feminists, (and anyone else who supports her), McCain/Clinton 08' will sweep the nation…Most of it anyways. This would actually be the dream ticket for the Republican Party, think about it" Bush the 3rd combined with Nixon! It's the unbeatable combination!

Also it's important to note that the resolution is not about IF* Clinton will accept to be McCain's running mate, but what running mate will be best for McCain. But it's fun to debate that point nonetheless despite it's moot ness.

Sources: (1) http://www.topix.com...
Debate Round No. 1
xsweetlove

Pro

Hillary CLinton would never be McCain's vice-presidential candidate. Her best bet would be to prolong the primary battle against Barack Obama and distract him from preparing to run as the presidential candidate in 2008. If he loses the election in 2008, it gives her a springboard to run in 2008.

Sarah Palin is every Republican's dream. Without a doubt, Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal are the future superstars of the GOP. They have done everything through their own merit as opposed to the backdoor methods of other members of their own party. Palin is the governor of a state which lends to her executive experience. This would balance out McCain's lack of executive experience as he is a senator. Also, she is a relatively conservative voter that goes after such issues as pork-barrel spending which is exactly what the governnment needs right now. In an interview, Newt Gingrich called her the "most aggressive reformer" in the country.
Bitz

Con

"Hillary Clinton would never be McCain's vice-presidential candidate. Her best bet would be to prolong the primary battle against Barack Obama and distract him from preparing to run as the presidential candidate in 2008. If he loses the election in 2008, it gives her a springboard to run in 2008"

It seems your don't take humor too well, I'll try to finish this debate seriously. The point you make is irrelevant to the resolution. The resolution is: "Who should McCain's Vice Presidential candidate be" Not "Who will McCain's Vice Presidential candidate be." I am here to debate which vice presidential candidate would help McCain the most, not which vice presidential candidate has the greatest chance of accepting McCain's offer. And there is not doubt that Hillary would boost McCain's campaign the most.

However, just to refute my opponent's moot point: "If he loses the election in 2008, it gives her a springboard to run in 2008" While this may be true, it won't even come close to the springboard she will get if she ran from a former vice president position.

"Sarah Palin is every Republican's dream."

Like I said, McCain doesn't need republican votes. It's almost guaranteed that republicans will vote for a moderate over Obama. What he needs is to get the independents and possibly some democrats to turn red. Sarah Palin is the last person who can accomplish this due to her zealous conservative voting record. Her opposition of same-sex marrages would be one example. A clear turn off to democrats, and some moderates. If anything, McCain will lose more independent voters with Sarah Palin. There is no doubt that any help Sarah Palin will do for McCain in the general election will be drastically overshadowed by Hillary Clinton's dividing the entire democratic party, not to mentions capturing the majority of the independents.
Debate Round No. 2
xsweetlove

Pro

Actually, McCain is moderate enough. He is what many conservative Republicans would like to call a RINO (Republican in NAME Only). He needs help winning over the conservative voters of his party as he only has a ACU lifetime rating of 83. That is drastically lower than the most conservative candidate on the chart, Tom Tancredo. Tancredo has an ACU lifetime rating of 99. As David Keene wrote in his column, McCain needs to "bridge-building and fence-mending" to do with conservative voters. Furthermore, McCain "has had difficulty winning support from self-identified Republican voters -- even in his native Arizona". McCain has little trouble with moderate/independent voters. In a general election match-up, McCain could probably give Obama a run for his money with these voters. MCain has yet to earn the trust of the conservatives. As you have pointed out, Sarah Palin has a very conservative voting record which could help McCain win conservative voters. Her values are very family centered. As John Gizzi notes in his article: "A proud member of Feminists for Life, the governor also opposes same-sex marriage or benefits going to couples that would equate to same sex marriage. When a state court ruled last year that civil unions were to be permitted for same sex couples, Palin called for amending the state constitution to upend the ruling and to place it on the ballot before voters." Unlike many other politicians, she practices fiscal responsibility as evidenced when she helped kill the bridge to nowhere and balanced the state budget by raising taxes. Also, she is an avid outdoorsman and lifetime member of the NRA. Surely, she would receive their endorsement. She is the answer for Barack Obama's cheap thrills and lack of experience. Two years of executive experience should be worth more than two years of legislative experience. Sarah Palin's youth and vitality might be just what the McCain campaign needs to rally conservative voters.

References:
www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=25717
Bitz

Con

I think you have completely missed the point.

"He needs help winning over the conservative voters of his party as he only has a ACU lifetime rating of 83. That is drastically lower than the most conservative candidate on the chart, Tom Tancredo. Tancredo has an ACU lifetime rating of 99."

McCain has the conservative vote in the bag. When faced with the choice in the general election, conservatives will never vote for Obama over the moderate McCain. It's simple logic: Do you want to get 25-50% of what you want by voting McCain with VP Hillary, or do you want to get 0% of what you want by voting for Obama with VP "insert hardcore liberal here". The main thing McCain has going for him is the fact that he is moderate, If he picks Sarah Palin this will not compliment his strong point, since it will take away from his moderate base as a whole, Sarah Palin may make conservatives happy, but as I explained before, McCain will get those votes regardless if he picks her or not. Not only that, but she will turn off the Democratic and Independent voters that McCain already has due to his moderate views.

"McCain has little trouble with moderate/independent voters."

Then why give him trouble by making Sarah Palin as his VP? Hate to break it to you but Sarah Palin's hardcore conservative views are turn-offs to the Independents and Democrats that McCain already has.

Of course David Keene is going to say McCain needs a right wing conservative for VP, he's a chairman of the American Conservative Union, and it's what he wants. But even if McCain would pick Hillary Clinton for VP, Keene would still vote for McCain, simple because Obama is any Conservatives greatest nightmare. McCain would definitely make conservatives happy by choosing Sarah Palin, but the fact of the matter is, the conservatives would vote for him anyways.

"MCain has yet to earn the trust of the conservatives."

McCain or Obama? Who do you think conservatives trust more?

"When a state court ruled last year that civil unions were to be permitted for same sex couples, Palin called for amending the state constitution to upend the ruling"

This is exactly why McCain should NOT pick Sarah Palin. Most Democrats and even moderates support civil unions; this is a turn off for them.

In addition you have failed to address my points about Hillary Clinton splitting the Democratic Party in two, which would by clearly the greatest asset to McCain's victory. Out of all the possible choices, no VP McCain chooses would cause as much damage and division to the Democratic Party than Hillary Clinton.

I have addressed your points, you have failed to address mine.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by kkcatlvr 8 years ago
kkcatlvr
i'm sorry, but i just can't see how anyone as liberal as Clinton would willingly run on the Republican ticket. But i have to say, Con had the better argument. McCain-Palin 2008!
Posted by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
Palin should be McCain's running mate, but Con definitely provided the best possible argument. Good job.
Posted by Bitz 8 years ago
Bitz
Vote: McCain-Hillary 08' :)
Posted by Bitz 8 years ago
Bitz
Sorry too late, it's all mine. yummy.
Posted by MaxHayslip 8 years ago
MaxHayslip
I wanted to take this up and argue, but I have no idea what the resolution is...
Posted by Geekis_Khan 8 years ago
Geekis_Khan
Oh... I don't even know who this woman is, but right away I see another point in there that you could bring out for your side...

But I don't want to help a debater. Maybe you'll see it by the next round. :)
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Rboy159 8 years ago
Rboy159
xsweetloveBitzTied
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 oboeman 8 years ago
oboeman
xsweetloveBitzTied
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 dbershevits 8 years ago
dbershevits
xsweetloveBitzTied
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 gahbage 8 years ago
gahbage
xsweetloveBitzTied
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 Bitz 8 years ago
Bitz
xsweetloveBitzTied
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 Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
xsweetloveBitzTied
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