The Instigator
luke1499
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
sidewinder
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Yes or No: Hillary Clinton for president 2016?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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...
sidewinder
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 779 times Debate No: 69039
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

luke1499

Con

1. We don't need another for years if not more of Democrats in the White House:
Democrats choose equality over freedom, they are destroying the middle class by making them pay taxes for people who could work for themselves. By taxing the upper class destroys job creation which means the rich will hire less and then the poor won't be able to get a job and this country will never be able to recover. The Democrats foreign policy is weak. The Obama administration's foreign policy is simply if we put a smile on our face and be nice we can achieve world peace through peace. This has led to the rise of new and dangerous islamic terrorist groups such as Isis. The fact that there are beheadings on TV is outrageous and an obvious clear need for change in politics. The Obama Administration was so liberal and loose that it allowed Ebola to come to America.

2. The Republicans have solutions to the problems in America and Democrats plans have failed:
The Republicans want to create jobs and lower taxes on small businesses to help them become successful. Help those who are on welfare get a job instead of giving them money which weakens the economy. The people that should be on welfare are people who can't find a job and people who are unable to work. The Republicans foreign policy is much stronger. If McCain or Romney was in office they would have hunted down Isis and defeated them. Sure you could say Bush wasn't able to kill Bin Laden but it was his program that was used when Bin Laden was killed.

3. Hillary wouldn't make a good president:
We have had enough of the Bush's and Clintons in the White House, Congress, and in Governors Mansions. The US economy is based on war conflicts support. Women usually more peaceful that's why there could be some hardships for companies who provide armaments to war conflicts thus the decrease of economy will be more likely for US. Benghazi was under Hillary Clinton's watch and she was secretary of state. You can't listen to Pelosi and blame the GOP they only had the house at that time. Hillary had the option of stopping it and she ignored it. She came out and said that she took responsibility for it. Clinton's is also getting older. I think a female president would be a good thing but Hillary is a grandmother and almost in her 70s. Her chance was 2008 and she lost. Hillary also would continue things like Obamacare and follow the Democrats economic plan which would destroy the economy.

We can't afford to have a Democrat in office in 2017. When the Democrats seem like the good guys remember that they are not because they say they are helping the poor but their policies don't work!
sidewinder

Pro

Thank you for this debate round I will focus on why Hillary Clinton would make a good presidential choice as well as how she is a vastly better option then the 25 current republican presidential nominees

1. The economy has improved greatly over the last 8 years from the economic rescission that we suffered in 2008 as a result of economic mismanagement and lack of regulation by the bush administration. Through the economic stimulus plan that has revitalized the auto industry, funding technological innovation that has made the US number one in wind power, and the worlds largest producer of oil. This was done along with the largest change in our nations medical insurance since the advent of social security. This groundbreaking program has helped or allowed 60 million previously uninsured Americans get affordable health insurance. These programs to name a few were all done in the first 2 years of President Obama's term yet when republicans took over congress in 2010 progress legislatively ground to a halt. Their have been quite literally no ligament bills that have passed through congress except for a few naming of federal buildings. So thus I pose the question why on earth should we relinquish control of the presidency to a party that has tried to repeal a law 29 times when they know it won't pass, why should we reward a party that has launched more filibusters than vote on actual legislation, and finally why should we vote for a party that is so divided that they currently have 25 presidential candidates?

Onto the success of Hillary Clinton who was first a senator from New York. In her terms she managed to secure funding for the rebuilding of the world trade center, investigated health risks passed by the 9/11 attacks, constantly visited military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, frequently criticized the Bush administrations mishandling of the Iraq war, help modernize government medical records n much more. As a secretary of state she succeed in increasing the appeal of America abroad which had fallen to all time lows since the Bush administration. In her brief 4 years as secretary of state she visited 112 countries and met with hundreds of world leaders. Many of the problems she helped surmount was dealing with the Arab Spring, Military Action in Libya,the killing of several terrorist leaders, and revitalizing trade agreements with the rest of the world mainly China and South America. The only "blemish" on her record is the Benghazi attacks which left several Americans dead. However in the most recent CIA support it was found to be the military's fault for the Benghazi attacks not Hillary Clinton.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.nytimes.com...

These are the qualifications that Hillary Clinton has and why I believe she should become president

Now onto rebuttals
1."Democrats choose equality over freedom"
Why not both freedom and equality are not mutually exclusive and in fact are intrinsically connected. For instance the US was not a free country in the 1950s due to segregation.

2."they are destroying the middle class by making them pay taxes for people who could work for themselves"
To quote Ben Franklin " In this world nothing can be said to be certain except for death and taxes"

3."By taxing the upper class destroys job creation which means the rich will hire less and then the poor won't be able to get a job and this country will never be able to recover"
Sigh.... what you are quoting is the doctrine of Reaganomics which I can not say more does not work. Economies are not driven through wealthy benefactors but are driven but innovation and a consumer society that can stimulate it. The economy that you propose had led to the wealthy 1 % securing over 40% of the nations wealth and has led to a net decrease in the middle classes purchasing power. For the economy that you desire is a boom bust economy that hurts the middle class and a skyrocketing national debt that because of the Bush tax cuts have has reached into the 18 trillion dollar range.
http://www.usdebtclock.org...

4."The Republicans want to create jobs and lower taxes on small businesses to help them become successful. Help those who are on welfare get a job instead of giving them money which weakens the economy"
This quote is a kin to saying that you need water to put out a fire but you don't know how to get the water. Thus all you have done is spouted republican rhetoric without proposing solutions. so lets break this apart. Democrats also want to cut taxes on small business and cooperation and create jobs so that's not particularly unique. Your discussion on wealth-fare ignores that a economy is driven by consumers and if consumers don't spend money the economy doesn't expand. Thus welfare does help the economy expand with a long way around consumer investment.

5. "The Republicans foreign policy is much stronger"
Really getting into two quagmire wars, getting the entire world to hate us, and a desire to use military force to achieve goals truly epitomizes strength????

6."The US economy is based on war conflicts support. Women usually more peaceful that's why there could be some hardships for companies who provide armaments to war conflicts thus the decrease of economy will be more likely for US"
This is where your argument goes from nativity to true insanity for if that is true you have 6,717 families to talk to explaining how the death of their son or daughter is helping stimulate the US economy. Or the 50,897 men and women who continue to be affected by the war either mentally or physically. So unless you plan to talk to those people don't you dare have the audacity to say that war is good for that opinion is exactly what is wrong with the world.

7."Benghazi was under Hillary Clinton's watch and she was secretary of state"
Yes but matching her failures to her success with Benghazi is a very small blemish especially when the CIA absolves her of fault in the incident in their report

8."You can't listen to Pelosi and blame the GOP they only had the house at that time. Hillary had the option of stopping it and she ignored it. She came out and said that she took responsibility for it"
Please elaborate what on earth you talking about

9."Hillary is a grandmother and almost in her 70s"
And your point is....

10. Obamacare
So I think we should start of are discussion on what exactly the affordable heath care act is and its three vital components

The first is the mandate for people to give people health insurance to all of the 47 million Americans that did not have healthcare when obamacare is passed. This was for a variety of reasons whether unemployed, not working for a big company to expensive or preexisting conditions. This is not the government forcing people to take government health insurance it is setting up a standardized market for people to get health insurance. This I cannot emphasis more does not effect all Americans in fact it only effects one third of them. However, the mandate that insurance companies have to take everyone could lead to everyone only getting healthcare when they were sick thus driving up premiums. To avoid this the government instituted a tax that takes 1% of your income if you do not get health insurance. This stops people from taking advatage of obamacare and using healthcare only when their sick.However if you put a economic penalty to people who don't want health insurance you inevitably get people who cannot afford insurance. This is when the government offers subsides to people who can't afford health insurance

Thus to put it simply obamacare is a three legged stool with the uninsured American being held up by these legs

1. Government mandated health insurance everybody needs to get health insurance from a provider whether public or private (5/6 of Americans already have health insurance so their not effected)

2. Tax of 1% of your income if you don not have health insurance to prevent people from taking advantage of obamacare's mandate that forces private companies to take all people no matter the preexisting condition.

3. Government subsides to help poor people who cannot afford health insurance

https://www.youtube.com...... (This is a credible source its from a doctor)

So please do tell me what is wrong with this law

My final conclusion is that Hillary Clinton would be a excellent choice for president due to her qualifications as a senator and secretary of state as well as the effective policies the democrats have pursued.
Debate Round No. 1
luke1499

Con

luke1499 forfeited this round.
sidewinder

Pro

I extend my arguments please vote for me
Debate Round No. 2
luke1499

Con

luke1499 forfeited this round.
sidewinder

Pro

Please vote for me
Debate Round No. 3
luke1499

Con

luke1499 forfeited this round.
sidewinder

Pro

I extend my arguments
Debate Round No. 4
luke1499

Con

luke1499 forfeited this round.
sidewinder

Pro

I extend my arrguments
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by chrisjachimiak 2 years ago
chrisjachimiak
I'm confused on which side con is arguing,. Tell me if I'm not mistaken, Hilary Clinton is a democrat, correct? You boosted the democratic party in your first point saying how good the Obama Administration. Also, are all of your points based off of personal belief considering you have NO evidence?
Posted by Shae.Tezaria 2 years ago
Shae.Tezaria
I find your lack of evidence disturbing.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
luke1499sidewinderTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture