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

Trump Is Not a Liar

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/27/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 502 times Debate No: 119629
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




The Washington Post started tracking President Trump's "lies" very early in his presidency--perhaps even before he was elected. Routinely, Friends and media outlets tell me variations on this theme: "Trump is a liar! "

============= Official Debate Thesis
President Trump doesn't lie (in all its shades and varieties) in a manner worthy of special tracking. His lack of complete honesty is in line with the mainstream of US politicians and media outlets nowadays.

============= Argument #1
WashPo's tracker of Trump's lies stands at 7, 546 (1). Sounds bad until you look at the data.

Here is one of the most repeated lies in the WashPo database, Representing a full 2% of all of Trump's so-called lies. Feast your eyes on this *horrendous assault against truth*: "There was no collusion. There was never any collusion" (2). WashPo calls THIS a lie? Their Fact Checker's explanation: Mueller hasn't made his report yet (3). Apparently, Anything Trump says about it will be a lie.

Publicly defending oneself cannot be the same thing as lying! This removes ALL credibility from WashPo's list according to Debate. Org: "Using fake facts destroys your credibility" (4). In a silly way, Fact Checkers only accept claims as true if they can find another source for the info. Too often this standard is insufficient.

(1) https://www. Washingtonpost. Com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/? Utm_term=. 0728f131ae69
(2 & 3) search site on "there was never any collusion" in the WashPo database
(4) https://www. Debate. Org/help/articles/tips-for-a-better-debate/


I happy to accept my opponent Red_Fox's challenge to discuss the important issue of whether or not Donald Trump is a liar and look forward this debate. I plan on responding in two ways: vagueness and the issue of collusion.

Point1: Vagueness

My opponent formulated the debate thesis in this way: "President Trump doesn't lie (in all its shades and varieties) in a manner worthy of special tracking. His lack of complete honesty is in line with the mainstream of US politicians and media outlets nowadays. "

There are two glaring issues with the thesis as it stands that makes the burden of demonstrating a lie almost impossible. The first problem occurs with the use of "special tracking. " What might constitute "special tracking? " Because Red_Fox does not give a criteria for what would distinguish such a lie, Such that it would warrant the description of "special, " it is equally possible that Red-Fox's subjective interpretation is the criteria, In which case no one could effectively contradict the thesis, Or all lies are equally "special, " which would mean I could affirm the thesis convincingly by stating a single lie from Donald Trump

The second vague phrase within the thesis is "is in line. " Like before, Red_Fox did not offer any criterion from which to distinguish a base line of dishonesty with a level needed to affirm the thesis.

Point 2: Collusion

While not the central thesis itself, My opponent used the Washington Post's fact check of Donald Trump's statements on collusion as an example of how the media is dishonest in its reporting; however, There are several problems with this.

2. 1 Donald Trump's statements on collusion are not isolated; rather, They are coupled with other claims (for example, His trashing of the Steele Dossier as fake despite it containing now confirmed details such as Trump-Russia and Trump-China business dealings) such that his entire statement is false

2. 2 Muller's investigation is not solely about collusion anyways so it is irrelevant.
Debate Round No. 1


===== Official Debate Thesis
I will try to clarify my thesis, Since "special tracking" and "is in line" are not defined:

Special Tracking --- meaning the existence of WashPo"s list. There are no Obama/Hillary Lie lists. This is special tracking, Or did Obama/Hillary never lie? To contradict this part of the thesis, You must show equivalent Obama/Hillary Lie Lists.

Is In Line --- meaning, Specifically, That Trump Lies are equivalent to Obama lies. Please nominate a Trump Lie or two to compare with my selection of Obama Lies. We will need criteria to judge pairs of lies by. I submit the following criteria, But am open to your additions and adjustments:
--- a) --- If the lie is part of a pre-written script, Then it is a worse lie than an extemporaneous comment/response.
--- b) --- If the lie affects the popularity of a piece of legislation, Then it is a worse lie than one about "commonly reported and known facts. "
--- c) --- If the lie has larger practical impact on the lives of ordinary US citizens, Then it is a worse lie.

===== Argument #1 "Non-lies"
I submitted the collusion quote as an example of a non-lie, Not "as an example of how the media is dishonest in its reporting. " In our country, "innocent until proven guilty" means publicly defending oneself is defined as not a lie. You claim that this quote is a lie because it is "not isolated. " What does that matter? 100 other lies doesn't make a non-lie into a lie.

WashPo"s List of 7000 Lies lacks credibility because it contains non-lies. Therefore, You cannot cite the mere existence of WashPo"s List (or any Fact Checker list) as evidence that Trump is a liar.

As of right now in this debate, The WashPo list has zero confirmed honest-to-goodness real lies. With this challenge, I suggest that you not waste our time on a single piddly little white lie. Please provide a BIG Trump Lie or an early extraordinary barrage of actual lies to contradict my thesis.


Radiantastic forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Radiantastic forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Radiantastic 3 years ago
I spent the majority of the time dealing with the thesis itself since that was of more concern to me. If you deny commonly reported and known facts like what I posted in my first round I will provide that information later on. 2000 characters is pretty limiting.
Posted by Thoht 3 years ago
You know the term "liar" still applies to people "At normal politician's levels of dishonesty" right?

You only need to have spoken a handful of lies before being called a liar, And for that to be true.

So is your claim that Trump has not told lies? How many lies need he have spoken for you to also say he is a liar? 1 a day? 2? 3?

That he has lied is not even a question. If 10% of the lies that list claims are true he would have told 1 lie a day since he took office. 20% would be 2. (rough numbers)

Really curious as to what would make you call him a liar, But he fact that he is one is really undeniable at this point, And it seems you've lost the debate. Your BoP is that he hasn't told any lies. I suggest you edit the debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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