The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Politicians doing political favors is hardly corruption, yes or no?

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
ilovejews7 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/14/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 567 times Debate No: 102985
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Clinton did anthony weiner wife a favor by hiring her friend to work for the state dept. So what if huma abedin friend was rewarded an awesome salary while others applicants crossed their fingers just for an you agree that it is who you know not what you can do in regards to politics and career success?

? I think career politicians are an example of success, do you agree?
unedited grammar punctuation bad sentence structure run on sentence


Since my opponent has neglected to do so, I take it upon myself to define corruption. For this, I turn to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary [1], which I presume my opponent accepts as a valid source for such definitions. It lays out the following definition for us:

"dishonest or illegal behavior especially by powerful people (such as government officials or police officers)"

As such, the definition consists of two parts that define corrupt behavior, paired together with an OR statement:
  • Dishonest: One acts dishonestly when they provide a continual public narrative for a policy, stance, etc. whilst holding ulterior motives which exist to serve their own benefits
  • Illegal: One acts illegally when, through their public actions, they come in violation of the law, often due to bribery (but not always)

Noting that only one of these factors need apply, let us continue, providing an example of a "political favor" with this in our minds.

Politician John Smith, a Oregon Democrat, wants to pass a resolution to build a bridge in his home state, which would benefit his reelection campaign by creating local jobs that he can claim to be responsible for. However, he is one vote shy. As such, he talks with Winston Alexander, a Montana Republican, who is looking for someone to hire his uncle. In exchange for the vote, a political favor, Smith hires the uncle, thereby giving Alexander a personal favor.

Now, because we are talking about political favors, let's examine it from the perspective of Alexander, who casts his vote for the legislation. Now, obviously he's not going to put out a public statement saying "Oh, I voted Yea because Smith hired my uncle." This would be politically toxic in more ways than one, not least in opening up corruption debates much like this one. Rather, he will must likely put out some sort of idealistic statement about "promoting infrastructure."

Illegal? No, it's not illegal.
Dishonest? Yes. He is lying about his reasons for doing so.

As such, even if on a smaller scale than typical corruption issues, the example above is nonetheless corrupt.

Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by levi_smiles 2 years ago
Such eloquence! How witty!
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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