• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I voted for Trump as soon as I became a citizen

That's fine.

Vote how you want to vote.
 
Casper said:
Point????
Click to expand...
Point???? What are the left's point of their nonstop 24/7 anti-Trump posts. Don't you think the other side should get a shot at a pro-Trump post?
 
Moderate Right said:
Point???? What are the left's point of their nonstop 24/7 anti-Trump posts. Don't you think the other side should get a shot at a pro-Trump post?
Click to expand...
Ok, so one recently naturalized citizen says they will vote for trump. Big whoop, I guess you should be allowed to celebrate good news, no matter how insignificant. Have a Party!
 
Moderate Right said:
Point???? What are the left's point of their nonstop 24/7 anti-Trump posts. Don't you think the other side should get a shot at a pro-Trump post?
Click to expand...

Sure, but the Pro-Trump posts should have some point of debate.

When I make an anti-trump post, I present a specific debate topic with a conclusion related to President Trump's inadequacy for the position. I present evidence for my conclusion that President Trump is inadequate to the office of the presidency, with a clear point of debate.

For example:
GDP growth 2016: 1.7%
GDP growth today: -3.8% (note the negative sign)

The unemployment rate 2016: 4.7%
The unemployment rate today: 8.4%

Budget Deficit 2016: $587 Billion
Budget Deficit today: $3,300 Billion

National Debt 2016: $19 Trillion
National Debt today: $26 Trillion

Annual Trade Deficit 2016: $502.3 Billion
Annual Trade Deficit today: $616.8 Billion

The economy was empirically better off when Joe Biden was in the White House.
Click to expand...

There are clear points of debate here. You can debate the accuracy of the premises by presenting evidence that my data is incorrect. Or you could concede that the data is correct, but contend that the conclusion is incorrect by showing an error in logic. There are premises and a conclusion. The conclusion is widely disagreed upon. Ergo, there was a point of debate.

Your post does not contain premises or conclusions. It gives an example of a person voting for Trump. No one disagrees that that person voted for Trump. So the question as to the point of the post remains.

Are you wanting to debate whether democratic socialists like AOC and Bernie Sanders are advocating "Socialism" in the same sense that was employed in Cuba? Are you wanting to debate whether the majority of immigrants will be voting for Trump? What is the point that you are hoping to debate in this thread?
 
Casper said:
Yeup, they don't. Are you still looking for those 3 Million illegals from 2016???
Click to expand...
Are you still looking for all of those people who voted for Trump because of the Russians?
 
a ton of people will vote for a broke con man.

that's on them.
 
AConcernedCitizen said:
Sure, but the Pro-Trump posts should have some point of debate.

When I make an anti-trump post, I present a specific debate topic with a conclusion related to President Trump's inadequacy for the position. I present evidence for my conclusion that President Trump is inadequate to the office of the presidency, with a clear point of debate.

For example:


There are clear points of debate here. You can debate the accuracy of the premises by presenting evidence that my data is incorrect. Or you could concede that the data is correct, but contend that the conclusion is incorrect by showing an error in logic. There are premises and a conclusion. The conclusion is widely disagreed upon. Ergo, there was a point of debate.

Your post does not contain premises or conclusions. It gives an example of a person voting for Trump. No one disagrees that that person voted for Trump. So the question as to the point of the post remains.

Are you wanting to debate whether democratic socialists like AOC and Bernie Sanders are advocating "Socialism" in the same sense that was employed in Cuba? Are you wanting to debate whether the majority of immigrants will be voting for Trump? What is the point that you are hoping to debate in this thread?
Click to expand...
Ummmmmmmmmmm, maybe you haven't heard yet, there is a worldwide pandemic going on. Democrats wanted us to lock down even more making our 33% drop in GDP and 11.5% unemployment even higher. There are no numbers large enough for the Dems to shoot for.
 
Moderate Right said:
Are you still looking for all of those people who voted for Trump because of the Russians?
Click to expand...
Nope, I never was. Are you claiming that Russia did not and is not still trying to interfere in our elections in favor of trump? Really?
 
Moderate Right said:
Isn't that the kind of president you want, someone who cons Republican voters? You should be voting for Trump.
Click to expand...

none of us should want a broke con man leading the free world.
 
Moderate Right said:
Ummmmmmmmmmm, maybe you haven't heard yet, there is a worldwide pandemic going on. Democrats wanted us to lock down even more making our 33% drop in GDP and 11.5% unemployment even higher. There are no numbers large enough for the Dems to shoot for.
Click to expand...

See? There you go. You didn't have to spend much time figuring out what the debate worthy point was. You found it right way. If you actually want to debate Trump's economic failure, I have a thread dedicated to the topic.

I was just giving it as an example here to illustrate the contrast. You say that this person voted for Trump. We all agree that they voted for Trump. Where is the debate worthy point?
 
CaughtInThe said:
none of us should want a broke con man leading the free world.
Click to expand...
What con? There was no con. But, you should like it if a Republican president is conning Republican voters. You should vote for him.
 
Moderate Right said:
This article says it all:

www.yahoo.com

I voted for Trump as soon as I became a citizen. Here's why I'm doing it again.

I gave up everything I knew to live in a nonsocialist country. That some Democrats here now praise socialism is among the reasons I support the president.
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
Click to expand...

So you found a lying moron. Congratulations. There are lots of them.

No one of account, and especially not Joe Biden, is arguing for government ownership of the means of production. Idiocy dismissed.
 
AConcernedCitizen said:
See? There you go. You didn't have to spend much time figuring out what the debate worthy point was. You found it right way. If you actually want to debate Trump's economic failure, I have a thread dedicated to the topic.

I was just giving it as an example here to illustrate the contrast. You say that this person voted for Trump. We all agree that they voted for Trump. Where is the debate worthy point?
Click to expand...
The debate worthy point is from someone with firsthand experience of socialism warning us not to go down that path, as Biden is being forced down that path. Democrats think that they can have Democratic socialism but that is what all socialists say in the beginning.
 
Moderate Right said:
The debate worthy point is from someone with firsthand experience of socialism warning us not to go down that path, as Biden is being forced down that path. Democrats think that they can have Democratic socialism but that is what all socialists say in the beginning.
Click to expand...

I can understand the equivocation errors that people make regarding terms like "Socialism", "Social Democracy", "Social Media", "Social Distancing" and "Social Sciences" etc. Despite the shared etymology, these things all represent very different concepts.

If you look at the Nordic model that AOC and Bernie Sanders refer to as "Democratic Socialism," it bears strikingly little resemblance to anything that happened in Cuba. It bears no relation to the works of Marx and Engles. It isn't the "Socialism" that this voter was trying to escape from, and bears little resemblance other than the etymological structure of the word. I can understand how they made that mistake, and I think it is unfortunate.
 
AConcernedCitizen said:
I can understand the equivocation errors that people make regarding terms like "Socialism", "Social Democracy", "Social Media", "Social Distancing" and "Social Sciences" etc. Despite the shared etymology, these things all represent very different concepts.

If you look at the Nordic model that AOC and Bernie Sanders refer to as "Democratic Socialism," it bears strikingly little resemblance to anything that happened in Cuba. It bears no relation to the works of Marx and Engles. It isn't the "Socialism" that this voter was trying to escape from, and bears little resemblance other than the etymological structure of the word. I can understand how they made that mistake, and I think it is unfortunate.
Click to expand...
Socialism is socialism is socialism. First you start out by claiming it is Democratic socialism then when they get total control of the government, they drop the Democratic part off. They have already said they would do away with the Senate filibuster and are going to pack the Supreme Court to give them unlimited power, making it nothing more than a branch of the federal government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom