The Instigator
haad
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Zarroette
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

insaf

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 2 votes the winner is...
Zarroette
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 380 times Debate No: 69762
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

haad

Con

today my dream was to be a polition and i become and in that i learn i prafer for insaf but it is not coming i wish my biggest dream will come in real when nawaz sharif will leave his seat and imran khan will come and this happened by darna and jalsa wil start i big hope with imran khan
dear juje and my majesty
i request to take side of imran khan and i will try to make a top level for him he always try and win
Zarroette

Pro

My opponent, in his opening stance, has made clear that the resolution is about him becoming a politician and by the side of Imran Khan in the Insaf party, that the current Insaf party is not doing well, or is at least doing worse than his alternative suggests. So, my opponent will be arguing to show that this should happen, whilst I will be arguing to show that it should not happen. I await my opponent's opening round of arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
haad

Con

haad forfeited this round.
Zarroette

Pro

My opponent has still yet to negate the resolution, meaning that he/she is yet to show that he/she should be part of Insaf. I will now construct a positive argument as to why Insaf would be better off without my opponent.


Affirmative Case


A1: My opponent's atrocious grammar


My opponent's opening round showcased some terrible grammar. Here are instances of it and why it matters.


Firstly, my opponent repeatedly fails to capitalise "insaf", the name of the organisation he/she wishes to represent. My opponent even fails to capitalise this in the resolution. I am sure that Insaf would be highly embarrassed to have a candidate that cannot even correctly capitalise the name of the organisation he/she represents.


Secondly, my opponent has incorrectly formatted a would-be letter:

"dear juje and my majesty
i request to take side of imran khan and i will try to make a top level for him he always try and win"


According to Wikihow, my opponent has left out some crucial aspects in his/her would-be letter, of which include the date of the letter and the signature of the letter-writer [1]. In politics, it is absolutely crucial that politicians present themselves well, and politicians will be, at some stage, be required to present themselves well through written letters [2].


Lastly, there are numerous instances of non-capitalised words that should be capitalised ("dear", "today", imran" etc.). Such complete disregard for he beautiful English language is not compatible with representing people as a politician, as politicians must present well and be able to express themselves well.



References

[1] http://www.wikihow.com...
[2] http://www.youthcentral.vic.gov.au...
Debate Round No. 2
haad

Con

haad forfeited this round.
Zarroette

Pro

My counter-arguments have gone uncontested. Please vote for me!
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by enternamehere 2 years ago
enternamehere
Bit harsh, symbiote :)
Posted by TheSymbiote 2 years ago
TheSymbiote
kill urself
Posted by DebaterOfTheMonth 2 years ago
DebaterOfTheMonth
Obvious troll is obvious
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by ResponsiblyIrresponsible 2 years ago
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
haadZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.
Vote Placed by Ajabi 2 years ago
Ajabi
haadZarroetteTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited and so Conduct goes to Pro, also Con provided no argument while Pro gave a criticism of Con's grammar. Con did make a lot of S & G mistakes and so I give those points to Pro. Happy to clarify!