The Instigator
zrosier6476
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
omar2345
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points

Donald Trump

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 1 vote the winner is...
omar2345
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/16/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 892 times Debate No: 119019
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (24)
Votes (1)

 

zrosier6476

Con

Donald Trump is a disgrace to the US. He talks about making the US great again, But he is nothing but a racist person. He talks about building walls to block out other countries.
omar2345

Pro

Define: Disgrace
Define: Racist
He talks about building walls to block out other countries. - Is this the reason why he is racist from the definition you have given?

I assuming this: If you agree with my definitions then there is no need to add your own

Disgrace: loss of reputation or respect as the result of a dishonourable action.
Racist:a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, Or who believes that a particular race is superior to another

You were not direct enough why Trump is a disgrace so I want you to elaborate.
Trump is not a disgrace because the economy is doing well.
Trump is not a racist for protecting his own country. For having borders you stop illegal aliens from coming across the border. This is not fair on people who are legally going through to the United States. This also does not help the alien in question because since they are not registered US citizen the laws are not bound to them. This means businesses can exploit aliens, Paying them less then the minimum wage, Unsafe working conditions and refuse to pay them and call ICE to deport them so that they get free labour. The free labour is an accusation but 7-eleven did release a statement that more or less suggests that if illegal aliens do not work sufficiently to their standard they will be deported by ICE.

Without walls there are no countries. If we have no countries then Anarchy will reign. It won't be everyone will be happier, It will consist of China migrating resources to the United States and attempting to take control of the United States. No centralised government no way in working together to stop China from invading and controlling the United States.




Source: https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=xo3agk7mMp8
http://nymag. Com/intelligencer/2018/11/7-eleven-ice-raids. Html

Debate Round No. 1
zrosier6476

Con

zrosier6476 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
zrosier6476

Con

zrosier6476 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago
omar2345
I think he would have won against Trump to. Bernie Sanders was not stating lame jokes "Pokemon go go to the poles" instead he kept to the ideas and cared about the working class. A populist like Trump. It would be just be about who would be the better populist. People like capitalism with high welfare (Nordic model) because they do not need to do anything and still would get everything they need to sustain themselves. Basically promotes being lazy and doing nothing with your life. Some people might need healthcare but for the majority it just give them the incentive just to stay home watch TV or play Video Games.

Just an assumption.
Posted by Block.19 3 years ago
Block.19
He was the more popular of the two
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago
omar2345
Turns out they should have picked Bernie Sanders. Oh well.
Posted by Block.19 3 years ago
Block.19
Yeah i would agree that they rigged their own election so they could run the candidate they wanted and not the one that Democratic voters may have wanted.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago
omar2345
I would just say they rigged the election. Not a criminal act since I think people vote for the democrat party and the democrats can decide whoever they want that vote to go to. This happens normally when another democrats loses the race to be the party leader. Their votes would go to Hillary. It is unethical and I still don't see why Bernie stays with the DNC again. If they do it once they will do it.

Bernie I would say the only person in the DNC I would vote for. Even though some of his policies are not helpful but with issues he does not appeal to the far-left and goes for what is right instead of doing what is trendy like abolish ICE which was a mainstream DNC view until they got elected. Bernie knew ICE was not the problem it was the regulation and legislation they had to follow. It is like blaming the army for following the orders even though the soldiers were not one giving them.
Posted by Block.19 3 years ago
Block.19
Yes i will agree that that those in charge at the DNC were favoring Hillary and were doing what they could to see that her and corporate dems win elections over Bernie and the more progressive candidates. However that is not treasonous behavior in a national sense, The DNC is not a part of the government. I will agree that it was unethical for them to have done so but it was not in anyway a criminal act.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago
omar2345
I am assuming what Donna Brazile meant:

If Hillary and Bernie were neck and neck with votes. The party would decide who they wanted to pick instead of the voters. If the democrats did not decide it would have been Bernie v Trump for the 2016 presidency.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago
omar2345
There is spaces in the URL delete them and it should go to the link with the information.
Posted by omar2345 3 years ago
omar2345
Donald Trump said Donna Brazile called Democratic primary 'rigged, ' but did she? (Politifact)

Donna Brazile's quote about DNC in the run up to the 2016 presidential election.

"I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, But I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. I had gone department by department, Investigating individual conduct for evidence of skewed decisions, And I was happy to see that I had found none. Then I found this agreement.

"The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, But it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, One campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, But as I saw it, It compromised the party"s integrity. "
Posted by Block.19 3 years ago
Block.19
im sorry i could not follow that link you left, Could you tell me what it was about?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 years ago
dsjpk5
zrosier6476omar2345Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con f2f over half of the rounds. This is poor conduct.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.