The Instigator
Paco3837
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
Ennui2778
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

ron paul is a serious candidate with a serious chance

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: 1/26/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,145 times Debate No: 2223
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (12)

 

Paco3837

Pro

Ron Paul has shown amazing growth in the face of a media blackout and a lack-luster national campaign. He was the only candidate besides Romney and Huckabee to take a county in Iowa, and came in second place in Nevada. It is only a matter of time before America votes for Ron Paul and joins the revolution.
Ennui2778

Con

There is one serious issue regarding the campaign of Ron Paul. His issues on several stances are, to say the very least, questionable.

Dr. Paul claims to value property rights and would work against legislation affecting America's industry an labour. It is Dr. Paul's seemingly blatant disregard for circumstantial factors that worries voters, not some poorly conceived internet conspiracy or the pandering of the media to "corporate interests"

Consider this worst-case scenario-

A man facing starvation consigns to work for an industrial firm, the terms of this contract require him to work 12 hours a day locked into a hellish plant with no health-safety regulations, no security, no benefits, etc. The truly disturbing part of Dr. Paul's plan is that man will be forced to take this job. There exists no way of protecting his personal right (which Dr. Paul claims to hold sacrosanct) to earn a steady, safe income. Faced with only one alternative: starvation, we will be confined to such a future of sequentially hellish occupations.

It was always my belief that this savagery was overcome by our government, and a mandate of the people long ago. Are we to forget all of those victories for working and middle classes as we enter into a period of private tyranny?
Debate Round No. 1
Paco3837

Pro

I disagree. This "hellish nightmare" you describe is simply a bad dream you are having after reading too much Upton Sinclair. The entire scenario is a moot point as the American economy is now moving away from factory labour and into the service sector. Ron Paul simply wants the government to step back and let society take its course. Americans feared that farmers who moved to the city to work in factories when they first arose during the industrial revolution would be abused an mistreated all day. These workers were abused and indeed mistreated, but eventually gained strength and established such things as a minimum wage. The factory workers who now go to work at Walmart will go through the same experience. Ron Paul does not seek to regulate employment, he would in fact do the opposite. Dr. Paul believes in the freedom of Americans to choose their employment. What you are describing is synonymous with Hitler, and WWII production of weapons by the jews.
Ennui2778

Con

For starters- Godwin's Law, the most important rule of having a grown-up conversation is to not compare everything you disagree with to Hitler.

That puerile reference to Upton Sinclair notwithstanding, your moot point argument is statistically wrong. While there is a significant trend towards the services sector, there is still a substantial part of America that still works in an industrial setting. A more substantial part, I may add, than has ever voted for Ron Paul. To a significant portion of America, my point is not moot at all, but a stark and disturbing possible future.

In addition, your argument is self-defeating. You agree that they were mistreated, and that they would gain strength. Dr. Paul seems quite determined to stifle those rights. You advocate nothing less than repealing or ignoring over half a century of labour laws just so we can "go through the same experience." The workers of the United States achieved said rights largely because there was a government for the people to appeal to.

Under Dr. Paul's plan, such a repolarization of our industries will lead to another twenty plus years of oppression and fruitless negotiation. The only difference at this time is that the government will be rendered helpless and immobile; beholden to such businesses and unable to pass any legislation because it existed before and was then struck down.

What Dr. Paul fails to grasp is that workers and owners are fundamentally different. Owners can fire and intimidate workers, and it doesn't work both ways. Dr. Paul's strategy of putting them on a par is effectively supporting the rule of owners over workers. Dr. Paul would not simply let "society take its course" as you say, but with the endorsement of state power there would be the concentration of resources on the side of the owners, thus extending that which Dr. Paul fails to see would occur.
Debate Round No. 2
Paco3837

Pro

Paco3837 forfeited this round.
Ennui2778

Con

Ennui2778 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Defenestrator 9 years ago
Defenestrator
I agree with Skiies23's assessment of the debate. It disappoints me to see a forfeited round when a debate starts to turn against somebody, that's the time when the person should turn the tables back, but anyway I personally believe that a lot of Dr. Paul's positions are over-idealistic; however I'd prefer the Republican party to move more in the direction of Dr Paul's positions rather than in the direction of Mike Huckabee's positions.
Posted by skiies23 9 years ago
skiies23
Ennui2778, there was only one word that you needed to say to prove your point, and you didn't say it: MONEY. FUNDRAISING.

Paco3837, I don't follow the "Hitler" comment. In fact, that should make you lose this debate, although Ennui2778 'concedes' the debate.

And, taking that both of you forfeited the last round, I say that Ennui2778 (Con) won the debate pretty easily.
Posted by Ennui2778 9 years ago
Ennui2778
Regrettably, circumstances unforseen will prevent me from continuing into future rounds. I concede this debate and will be absent from the site for an extended period of time, I thank you for your consideration and ardently apologize for this absence. I do hope that we will be able to debate some time in the future when I am not thus occupied.

Once more, I apologize, and great job with your debate.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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 skiies23 9 years ago
skiies23
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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 kato0291 9 years ago
kato0291
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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 sccrplyr40 9 years ago
sccrplyr40
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by FreedomPete 9 years ago
FreedomPete
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by trayhayes 9 years ago
trayhayes
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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 9 years ago
Danielle
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Defenestrator 9 years ago
Defenestrator
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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 pazmusik 9 years ago
pazmusik
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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 MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
Paco3837Ennui2778Tied
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