The Instigator
zagboy
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
NothingSpecial99
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

is Donald trump racist?

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 3 votes the winner is...
NothingSpecial99
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/7/2016 Category: People
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 505 times Debate No: 87827
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

zagboy

Pro

Donald is trying to exile Hispanics out of the country!
NothingSpecial99

Con

Very well, I accept.

The BOP is on Pro to prove that Donald Trump is racist.

Racism -
  • : poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race

  • : the belief that some races of people are better than others



Trump is a lot of things, but I will prove in this debate that racist is not one of them.
Debate Round No. 1
zagboy

Pro

In 1991 he was accused of making racial slurs against blacks in a book written b John R. .
NothingSpecial99

Con

Rebuttal:

Round 1

You do not back up this claim. What he actually stated is that he wanted to deport all illegal immigrants. It just so happens that Hispanics make up a large portion of illegal immigrants. If anything, it seems that he is enforcing current immigration laws.

http://www.bbc.com...

Round 2

This is nothing more than a bare assertion no matter who makes the claim. You would need to provided documented proof that Donald Trump made racial slurs.
Debate Round No. 2
zagboy

Pro

zagboy forfeited this round.
NothingSpecial99

Con

My opponent forfeited and I refuted his argument with no response.
Vote Con
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by tejretics 8 months ago
tejretics
Also, for further completeness, the S&G point is tied. The reason for that is two-fold. (1) The S&G point is *only* to be awarded in cases where there was such a massive disparity in S&G that it made the arguments significantly incoherent. The purpose of the 7-point system is about how each of the point categories affected arguments in the debate. In this debate, there was no significant disparity as such to warrant awarding a whole one-seventh of the vote. Neither side made major grammatical errors sufficient to make the argument incoherent or severely hurt readability. (2) Despite the fact that some hurting of readability is sufficient to award S&G, I do not award S&G in such cases because I believe one-seventh of the whole victory is only merited in the *most extreme* of cases that hurt readability.

Thus, S&G is tied.
Posted by tejretics 8 months ago
tejretics
Arguments -- I think the arguments point clearly goes to Con. Note that the full BOP is on Pro since Pro is making an affirmative fact claim. Pro has two arguments: (1) Trump is trying to exile Hispanics from the country, and (2) he made racial slurs against a certain race. If Pro upholds these two points, Pro wins. But Pro fails in doing so. Con refutes #1 by showing that the argument's link isn't clear; Con shows that Trump isn't deporting immigrants *because* of their race, it just so happens that the majority of immigrants are Hispanic. Con wins (2) because Pro merely shows an *accusation,* and commits an appeal to authority fallacy. It isn't sufficient to say "X said the resolution is true," one has to explain why that is the case. Pro fails to do that. Con easily wins.

Conduct -- Pro forfeited a round, which is generally not considered good conduct in a debate setting. By convention, conduct to Con.

Sources -- Pro makes multiple bare assertions and appeals to authority, without properly justifying any of their claims. Without proper justification, there's no significant impact to be gained from their arguments. Con demonstrates that Pro's only source is unreliable since it is a bare assertion and appeal to authority, and represents an *opinion* rather than a *fact.* On the contrary, Con justifies every claim they make with reliable sources (the BBC and Merriam-Webster for the definitions). This justification is critical to Con's argument because without the justification it would have been an ipse dixit. All of Pro's arguments are either not justified with reliable sources or merely asserted with one source that has questionable authenticity, isn't accessible since the full name of the source is cut off, and merely seems to represent an appeal to authority. Con clearly explains the content of their sources, and justifies an assertion with a source.

Thus, I vote Con.
Posted by lannan13 8 months ago
lannan13
Conduct goes to Con due to Pro's forfeiture. The forfeiture severely harms him in this debate as he was unable to give a final word and lost his last chance at providing a rebuttal to Con as well as making a last chance argument. I have to give Con the sources points since he accurately provided key and accurate sources to help aid in his argumentation. He brings in a source from a well accredited news source in BBC, this source was used for him to show that Hispanics are a large portion of illegal immigrants in and coming to the US. This then sprouts into his claim that since they are part of the illegal immigrant population that Trump is justified in his actions as he would just be reforming boarder security. Pro brings in an argument that Trump makes racial comments, but does not actually find a source outside of telling us an author's name. Con points this out as not being truely feasible and making a judgement on this would be rediculious. Pro's forfeiture in Round 3 caused him to be unable to fully respond Con's points or be able to refute any arguments that were made in the debate. THus turning the debate into a one-sided contest in favor of Con.

With all above said, I give the debate to Con.
Posted by whiteflame 8 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: lannan13// Mod action: Removed<

6 points to Con (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con due to Pro's forfeiture. Arguments go to Con since he refuted all of Pro's points and he gains sources since he's the only one who used sources.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Arguments require further explanation. While there weren't many arguments from Pro, the voter still has to analyze them in the RFD. (2) Sources are insufficiently explained. Merely having the numerical advantage in sources is not enough, as the sources Con gave had to contribute to the debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by EmperorDao 9 months ago
EmperorDao
Trump is one of the more surprising candidates we've seen so far. The stuff he seems to have no problem saying kinda reveals that he's obviously a racist... among other things. This debate topic requires a full on redneck or someone who is in desperate need of a challenge and wishes to argue a fact lol
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 8 months ago
tejretics
zagboyNothingSpecial99Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments
Vote Placed by lannan13 8 months ago
lannan13
zagboyNothingSpecial99Tied
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: RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 8 months ago
whiteflame
zagboyNothingSpecial99Tied
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: BoP was on Pro, and he dropped it. None of his arguments proved his point as Con provided credible responses showcasing both that Trump's policy views are not race-based and that Pro's points are all assertions that fail to provide definitive proof. As Con carried no burden but to show that Pro had not carried his, Con succeeded and so I vote Con. Conduct to Con for the forfeit.