Trump is better than Obama - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Trump is better than Obama
in Politics

By IshaanKhalapIshaanKhalap 15 Pts
Trump is a better president than Obama. Not talking about personal life here, but actual politics. Obama wasted 8 years of our time, with almost nothing to show for it. And please don’t start throwing around accusations of being racist and white privilege and everything, because I’m actually not white. 
dab2048AlofRIethang5ih8shartsGeorge_HorseCYDdharta
  1. Live Poll

    Conservative or Liberal

    20 votes
    1. Active Conservative
      30.00%
    2. Kind of Conservative
      10.00%
    3. Neither
      40.00%
    4. Kind of Liberal
        5.00%
    5. Active Liberal
      15.00%



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 446 Pts
    Personal preference I guess. I haven't really looked into this that much.  What I do know is that a lot of people including myself tend to think of Trump as an idiot. However, whatever one thinks of a president is irrelevant to the validity of what policies they've prescribed and/or other things they've said. I don't have enough data in front of me to determine who is better, however. As with all presidents, there are bound to be advantages as well as disadvantages I would think. Sorry, if that is not enough but that is my 2 cense.
    George_Horse

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • TKDBTKDB 256 Pts
    Each President, is responsible for the country as a whole.

    And each President's legacy, via their time in the Oval Office, is going to speak for itself.

    Their individual political philosophies, are a barometer for how they affected the country. 

    And the individual actions, of the rest of the political representatives, outside of the Oval Office, via their individual political philosophies, and how they as well, affect the rest of the country, is it's own barometer. 

    That's how I view the Presidency.
    Polaris95Zombieguy1987George_Horse
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1793 Pts
    edited May 31
    Obama, in my view, is one of the worst presidents in the US history. He is a good illustration of the fact that simply being extremely intelligent and well-meaning does not necessarily translate into making reasonable political decisions. The US has been descending into statism for over a century now, and I can think of 4 presidents who contributed to it the most: Wilson, Roosevelt, W Bush and Obama. Although it all really started with Lincoln. Regardless, I am glad to have no more statist policies and naive international peacemaking being pushed by the most important person in the world which is the president of the US.

    Trump is slightly below average overall. His trade and immigration policies are bizarre, but he seems to be slowly learning his way around, and, for example, the proposed skilled immigration system he is pushing through is something the US has needed for a very long time. When he was elected, I thought his presidency would be a total disaster and he would not last for more than 1-2 years before being impeached for incompetence - but in actuality he turned out to listen to his more experienced advisors. He is also an active doer: when he wants something done, he does not talk about it for ages and, instead, just goes for it. His accomplishments with regards to diplomatic relations with North Korea and opposition to Iran and Cuba is a welcome change from the previous president who bowed to their leaders. He also switched his stance on Russia quickly, once he realised that Putin is not a very trustworthy business partner.
    If he realises that his trade policies are harming the economy and reverses them before the end of his term, then I will change my assessment of him from "slightly below average" to "average". The tariffs are a bummer, and not something I expected to see in the leading economy in the world in the 21st century; I would think that an experienced businessman would understand how trade works. Maybe he does and just panders to his voter base. Or maybe he is after his self-interest, as the tariffs give his businesses a temporary local edge.

    In terms of their personas, Obama is a pleasant eloquent intelligent knowledgeable guy, while Trump is an attention-seeking bully. But, again, in politics personal traits are not nearly as important as what the person is going to do with them.
    Zombieguy1987AlofRIethang5ZeusAres42ih8shartsGeorge_Horse
  • Why not ask what is better: Vanilla ice cream or Chocolate ice cream?

    Are there any objective standards on which to evaluate the "quality" of any president?  I don't think so... Answers will always correspond to political philosophy...

    As a human being though, Obama is definitively the better man...
    CYDdhartaAlofRIethang5ZeusAres42George_Horse
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • Avi12750Avi12750 8 Pts
    edited June 9
    Your first point is that Obama wasted 8 years of our time. However, I have to disagree with you. First off, he gave members of the LGBTQIA community the right to get married, he changed the stereotype of only old white men getting elected which made our country look better, he cut the unemployment rate in half, and he ended the war in Iraq. He ordered for the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden which Republicans can agree is a good thing, he saved the U.s auto industry, dropped the veteran homeless rate by 50%, and signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to combat pay discrimination against women. (Source: Tod Perry, The Daily Good)

    If you think that these things are a waste of time then you should seriously rethink your beliefs.

    Donald Trump has been president for three years already, and he is a COMPLETE IDIOT. He decided that instead of spending money on entitlement programs we should spend money on a wall to keep Mexicans out that wont even help. He is a spoiled rich kid who grew up on daddy's money and says that he is "self-made".

    Remember these are just my opinions on the presidents so don't get offended. I have no clue who you are and nothing against you personally.
    CYDdhartaAlofRIethang5
  • Avi12750Avi12750 8 Pts
    edited June 9


  • SharkySharky 97 Pts
    It's unfortunate that so many Americans base their support or opposition to the President strictly on their party affiliation or on their perception of the President's personal likability. I understand why so many people don't like Donald Trump personally and why so many liked Barack Obama; a lot of it is a construct of the media. When you consider the incessant barrage of negativity concerning Trump from the leftist-biased media and the fawning sycophancy that they've heaped on Obama to this day, it's a wonder that Trump has any support at all. So why does he? 

    By almost any objective measure, the country is doing better now than at any time under Obama. Economic data is nearly universally better. Our enemies know that they are no longer dealing with a President who will kowtow to them, apologize for our country or back down from a situation where we are being manipulated or cheated. The American people have been begging for decades for Congress to address and fix many long-term problems that have done irreparable harm to the country and to no avail. Immigration, education, energy, foreign policy and trade policy come immediately to mind as issues that have devolved and festered in dysfunction and failure for many, many years. Past Presidents tolerated and even went along with this inaction and tolerance of the status quo. Trump does not. 

    To people who chose to remain uninformed, Obama seemed like a nice, personable, intelligent guy who had the potential to bring the country together thanks in large part to his mixed-race ancestry. Nothing could have been further from the truth. Anyone who did even a cursory amount of research on the man's background would soon discover that Obama carefully hid his true self from the public. He was born to, raised by and indoctrinated by devoted Marxists. He embraced all of their discredited teachings throughout his education. He was instilled with a resentment of his "mother's race" as he attested to in one of his books, a position that would have been condemned as viciously racist if directed at his father's race. Obama became an enthusiastic disciple of Saul Alinsky, the socialist Chicago community organizer and rabble rouser who wrote the leftist handbook, Rules for Radicals. Obama's pre-election promise to "fundamentally transform" the United States was telling. The man never had the interests of the country or its people in mind. He had the interests of the globalist left close to his heart. Obama was, and is, a wolf in sheep's clothing. One need only look at his weaponization of the Justice Department and the IRS to attack his political enemies and his promise to Dmitri Medvedev to be "more flexible" with Vladimir Putin once he was re-elected. The way in which he ushered in hundreds of thousands of unvetted Muslim refugees to the US and distributed them throughout the American heartland while ignoring the persecuted Christian minority in the Middle East who were being subject to virtual genocide tells a lot about the man's values and his vision for the future of our country.

    You don't have to like Donald Trump personally in order to see that he is an infinitely better President than Obama could ever have hoped to be. Trump loves the country. Obama, despite half-hearted attempts to show otherwise, never did.  
    PlaffelvohfenAlofRICYDdhartaethang5George_Horse
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    Avi12750 mentioned some of the good things Obama did. I would add to it that he held our allies, laws and security institutions in high esteem, unlike Trump who is destroying all relationships, internal and external, that don't include murderous dictators. 

    Obama WOULD have achieved much more if not for the "do nothing Congress" of Mitch McConnell, and the infamous, un-American, meeting of conservative traitors who agreed to "make him fail", make him a "one term President". With support like that, Jesus Christ could get little done!

    Since then, THIS "Commander-in-Cheat" has endeavored to tear down everything good Obama was able to do. The current occupier of the Waste House has also endeavored to destroy ALL of our national security organizations, spread distrust throughout the country, spread distrust throughout our allies, insulted every head of state that hasn't killed someone lately, and cuddled up with every deadly authoritarian dictator on Earth … with the exception of the Venezuelan upstart and Castro. He has tried to destroy every environmental advance the world has made in the last few years, every trade relationship we've had, given himself and his wealthy friends a HUGE boost in financial holdings …. while "Indian-giving" a pittance to the working people … which is gone, for the most part. Putin has killed, Kim has killed, MBS has killed, all with the benefit of Trumps "Nobody really knows" (and I don't want to), blessing.
    Putin is getting braver, trying to goad our planes and ships into an "international incident", he's being "allowed" to attack our elections with NOTHING being done about it. He's WON in Syria (we lost), He's moving into Venezuela, into the Arctic, and making nice with the Philippine dictator … literally surrounding U.S.! Trump has pulled out of every working truce or agreement that wasn't working … in HIS mind, only. He holds the record (one that will likely never be broken) for political (and personal) lies. (10,000 and counting.....)! He has convinced much of the country that we have more "mental health problems than any other country on Earth" ('cause they result in so many deaths"). 

    An example of Cadet Bone-Spurs  "accomplishments" up to a year or so ago, when the Executive Orders numbered only 39: Fewer than half actually made a change in Federal Policy. 16 told agencies to "study the problem or recommendation". The agency could/would do that anyway. 2 were rejected by the courts (on migrants). One was rescinded (hiring) because it was causing too much backlash at VA hospitals and SS offices. Another was negated by another that took Bannon off the NSC Panel. That leaves 12 that succeeded, most of which involved environmental policies by Obama. (Those helped polluting corporations … wonderful! (And hurt the American people)!

    I could go on, but, gotta take a shower, I feel dirty just thinking about what's happening. It's hard to believe that some on this page compare Herr Gropenfuhrer "favorably" to Obama, even superior! He has given Evangelicals a new mantra: Blessed are the philanderers, for they shall be overlooked.

    No. We do not have a superior leader in the Shite House. He has a NEW way to MAGA, it's spelled Russia.
    PlaffelvohfenCYDdhartaethang5
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    The best thing 0bama did while in office was to weaken his party to a degree it hasn't seen since the 30s.  He caused them to lose the House, the Senate, and ultimately SCOTUS and the presidency.  Over 1000 seats were lost by his party during his tenure nation-wide.
    AlofRIZeusAres42
  • SharkySharky 97 Pts
    @AlofRI

    Isn't it odd how a President who is said to be SO bad by so many leftists can be presiding over a country that is SO rapidly rising out of the ashes of the Obama embarrassment? Our economy is booming. Anyone who wants to work has multiple opportunities to choose from and because the competition for labor is so fierce, wages are finally rising for the working class. GDP growth continues to double that of the Obama years. Trillions of dollars stashed overseas by American corporations keeps pouring back into the country thanks to tax reform. Long-standing problems that have festered and been ignored in DC are finally being addressed directly. Our enemies instinctively know that we are no longer the pantywaist laughingstock that we were under Obama. The days of foreign adversaries ripping off the American taxpayer are effectively over. The feeling of confidence and pride in this country is palpable now. Under Obama, the feeling was despair and embarrassment. 

    Never has there been a liar the caliber of Obama in the White House. The American public doesn't even know the guy's true biography because of the MSM being completely in the tank for the liar. The fact that the MSM refused to do their job by exposing him and his true history doesn't diminish the scope and magnitude of the lies he foisted on us. We are still suffering the effects of his duplicity and his traitorous behavior. Fortunately, it won't be for long thanks to Trump' tireless efforts to reverse all of Obama's colossal damage. What is sad is that there were so many Americans so intellectually lazy, gullible and feckless that they bought into all of the lies of Obama and elected him President. His re-election is easily one of the lowest points in American history. 
    CYDdhartaAlofRIethang5
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    @Sharky The only place the economy is booming is on Wall Street. The GDP is NOT doubling, it's up and down and it was as high or higher twice during Obama. Our "enemies" (I'm not sure who they are anymore, OR our friends), but, Trump has done NO damage to "the enemy". He meets with them behind closed doors with no witnesses, "punishes" them with sanctions that are never enforced (except against Iran where he wants to go to war).

    "The feeling of confidence and pride in this country is palpable now." Wow, that may be the most misinformed statement I've heard since HIS last speech. The debt is historical … maybe even hysterical … people are worried about health care, their mortgages, the price of meds and food, their National Parks, their water, their air, their kids education … their kids chance at a decent life.

    A "good economy" is when one job would support a household, pay a mortgage, educate the kids, put some money in the bank for emergencies and retirement, not worry about an illness causing bankruptcy, a vacation now and then. Some have that, but it's a minority. Kids are living at home making minimum wage, helping to pay the mortgage, rents are SKY HIGH. The infrastructure is deteriorating, we are being left behind by China and others in the "new technologies". Some "stolen" from U.S., most SOLD to them by greedy capitalists looking for a quick profit. The foreign money brought back was used to by back stocks and update technology in plants (read robots), inflating stock values and not to create jobs. Take away the second jobs many are working or those who HAVE to work MORE to make ends meet, and unemployment would be higher. Obama created hundreds of thousands more jobs, and raised the value of the Stock Market MORE than Trump has, all you have to do is look at the records. You won't find them on conservative news. You CAN NOT deny the lies, the disgrace around the world. The U.S. cannot be trusted … unless you are an authoritarian government. We are closer to war now than we were all during the Obama (respectable) Presidency. Let's see … how many of the "finest people" have left this administration in disgrace? (Or just got the hell out of Dodge)?

    " Long standing problems that have festered and been ignored in DC are finally being addressed directly." O.K., I'll give you that …. the swamp has been dredged deeper, and it's supporting more and MUCH larger predators than ever before. MAGA.

    Obama was the only President since Ike elected TWICE by over 50% of the vote. Trump has been elected once by a shortage of 3,000,000 votes, and a LOT of people taking electronic propaganda seriously … and foolishly. THAT'S a legacy that Trump cannot take away. That, and Obama did NOT destroy our Constitution … daily ... or dangle pardons over criminals to keep their mouths shut.
    PlaffelvohfenCYDdhartaethang5
  • ethang5ethang5 150 Pts
    >Are there any objective standards on which to evaluate the "quality" of any president?

     :flushed: 

    Really? Really?
  • Obama was one of the worst presidents in American history. First off, he gave billions of dollars to Iran to try to prevent them from attacking us, but Iran used that money to start building a nuclear weapon. He also released prisoners from Guantanamo Bay allowing them to rejoin the forces fighting against us. Obama also created so many stupid health care programs that take up so much of our money.
  • "Trump is a demagogue, who seems to appeal to the lowest common denominator', - Stephen Hawking
    CYDdhartaAlofRIPlaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.


  • Calling a quoted opinion of someone a fallacy lmao. Your overuse and misunderstanding of the fallacy system and what fallacies are is also reflected in the fact that almost every one of them I flag no points get taken off me via the Moderator of this site!
    Plaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts

    Calling a quoted opinion of someone a fallacy lmao. Your overuse and misunderstanding of the fallacy system and what fallacies are is also reflected in the fact that almost every one of them I flag no points get taken off me via the Moderator of this site!

    I call fallacies where I see them.  Your quote was definitely a fallacy, and I don't care about anyone's points.
    ethang5
  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 446 Pts
    edited June 23
    CYDdharta said:

    Calling a quoted opinion of someone a fallacy lmao. Your overuse and misunderstanding of the fallacy system and what fallacies are is also reflected in the fact that almost every one of them I flag no points get taken off me via the Moderator of this site!

    I call fallacies where I see them.  Your quote was definitely a fallacy, and I don't care about anyone's points.
    A fallacy is an error in reasoning and/or argumentation. My last post was a quoted opinion of someone; not any form of argument being presented. My last post was definitely not a fallacy.  Read up on fallacies or better yet take a course on critical thinking. Hope that helps.
    Plaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    A fallacy is an error in reasoning and/or argumentation. My last post was a quoted opinion of someone; not any form of argument being presented. My last post was definitely not a fallacy.  Read up on fallacies or better yet take a course on critical thinking. Hope that helps.

    You quoted a fallacy.  The fact that you posted it serves as an endorsement of that fallacy.
    ZeusAres42Plaffelvohfen
  • CYDdharta said:
    A fallacy is an error in reasoning and/or argumentation. My last post was a quoted opinion of someone; not any form of argument being presented. My last post was definitely not a fallacy.  Read up on fallacies or better yet take a course on critical thinking. Hope that helps.

    You quoted a fallacy.  The fact that you posted it serves as an endorsement of that fallacy.
    Nope, I quoted an opinion like I keep saying. And the fact that I posted it serves as an endorsement of that opinion. Stephen hawking was giving an opinion of someone; not presenting an argument.
    Plaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts

    Nope, I quoted an opinion like I keep saying. And the fact that I posted it serves as an endorsement of that opinion. Stephen hawking was giving an opinion of someone; not presenting an argument.

    Then you've committed a subjectivist fallacy by including an opinion.  Take your pick, either way you posted a fallacy.
    ZeusAres42Plaffelvohfenethang5
  • CYDdharta said:

    Nope, I quoted an opinion like I keep saying. And the fact that I posted it serves as an endorsement of that opinion. Stephen hawking was giving an opinion of someone; not presenting an argument.

    Then you've committed a subjectivist fallacy by including an opinion.  Take your pick, either way you posted a fallacy.
    Incorrect again.




    The above links should hopefully give you a clearer picture of what the subjectivist fallacy is and when it actually applies.

    Note 1: You have not demonstrated how this is a fallacy; you're just claiming it is and now you've attached a "fallacy label" to it that doesn't even apply here.

    Note 2: There were no premises, no conclusion, no argument and therefore no fallacy in that post regardless of whether you believe there was or not.

    For this to be an actual subjectivist fallacy (AKA Relativist Fallacy) it would have to go something like this:
    Jim: I think Donald Trump is a demagogue that seems to appeal to the lowest common denonimator.

    Bob: While that may be true for you it is not true for me, and therefore what you just said is false.
    As you can see it's clearly Bob committing the subjectivist fallacy here.

    Moreover, given the caliber of Stephen Hawking's ability to think coherently about things, and given the fact that what I have witnessed about some of the things Trump said when he was campaigning and the witnessing of some of his fans I'd have to contend that Stephen's Hawking's formed opinion was objectively based anyway. 

    This isn't to say, however, that there are times where Trump has done or said good things. From an objective viewpoint, he is also a good businessman according to a number of people.
    CYDdhartaPlaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • CYDdharta said:

    Then you've committed a subjectivist fallacy by including an opinion. Take your pick, either way you posted a fallacy.
    The reason why this is a fallacious thing is because in a standard form your argument looks like this:

    Premise 1: "You've included an opinion."

    Premise 2: "By including an opinion you've committed the subjectivist fallacy."

    Conclusion: Therefore you committed a fallacy and it's false.

    Explanation: Despite the premises not being accurate the mere inclusion of an opinion does not equate to the commitment of the subjectivist fallacy.

    The fallacy you have committed yourself here btw is Argumentum Ad logicam. See the following for an explanation:

    Form

    It takes the following form: P1: Argument A supports proposition P.
    P2: Argument A contains a logical fallacy.
    C: Proposition P is false.
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy
    This is actually a common fallacy among people that are new to the concept of logical fallacies. 


    I really can't make this any simpler.

    Plaffelvohfenethang5

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts

    Incorrect again.




    The above links should hopefully give you a clearer picture of what the subjectivist fallacy is and when it actually applies.

    Note 1: You have not demonstrated how this is a fallacy; you're just claiming it is and now you've attached a "fallacy label" to it that doesn't even apply here.

    Note 2: There were no premises, no conclusion, no argument and therefore no fallacy in that post regardless of whether you believe there was or not.

    For this to be an actual subjectivist fallacy (AKA Relativist Fallacy) it would have to go something like this:
    Jim: I think Donald Trump is a demagogue that seems to appeal to the lowest common denonimator.

    Bob: While that may be true for you it is not true for me, and therefore what you just said is false.
    As you can see it's clearly Bob committing the subjectivist fallacy here.

    Moreover, given the caliber of Stephen Hawking's ability to think coherently about things, and given the fact that what I have witnessed about some of the things Trump said when he was campaigning and the witnessing of some of his fans I'd have to contend that Stephen's Hawking's formed opinion was objectively based anyway. 

    This isn't to say, however, that there are times where Trump has done or said good things. From an objective viewpoint, he is also a good businessman according to a number of people.

    Wrong, you didn't just post that as some random and meaningless quote.  When you post such a quote on a debate site, it it your argument.  Anything posted here is either a debate topic or an argument. You cannot claim "it's just an opinion" after the fact as that is committing the aforementioned subjectivist fallacy;

    The subjectivist fallacy is committed when someone resists the conclusion of an argument not by questioning whether the argument’s premises support its conclusion, but by treating the conclusion as subjective when it is in fact objective. Typically this is done by labelling the arguer’s conclusion as just an “opinion”, a “perspective”, a “point of view”, or similar.

    More to the point; As you have admitted you're are using someone's opinion as an argument, in addition, you are committing an appeal to authority (or more specifically an appeal to false authority) fallacy.  Stephen Hawking was a brilliant physicist, but he had no particular training in political science.  In fact, his debilitation caused him to be cloistered for most of his life, with very limited contact to the public, and since he was British, he had almost no contact with the American public.  Hawking's opinion of Trump and Trump's supporters could have only come from media reports, which were undeniably biased against Trump.  Garbage in, garbage out.  The difference between Trump rallies and anti-Trump rallies is stark.  Trump rallies are attended predominantly by people who respect the law; the crowds are excited, but law-abiding.  Anti-Trump rallies, on the other hand, are attended by people who have very little regard for the law, who believe in taking control by any means necessary, and far too often end in riots and destruction.

  • Why not ask what is better: Vanilla ice cream or Chocolate ice cream?

    Are there any objective standards on which to evaluate the "quality" of any president?  I don't think so... Answers will always correspond to political philosophy...

    As a human being though, Obama is definitively the better man...

    You do actually make a very good point here. In regard to evaluating the quality of any president, it would have to rest on standards of subjectivity than of objectivity as far as I can see.

    The fact is that no one is infallible and that includes presidents. There are both advantages and disadvantages that come with any president that I can see just like there are with many things in general.

    But anyway, you're absolutely right, this is mostly about political philosophy.

    Plaffelvohfen

    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • SharkySharky 97 Pts
    @AlofRI

    Hi, Al. First off, thanks for the low-hanging fruit!

    Let's start with the economy. When will you Democrats stop cherry-picking and spinning statistics and finally acknowledge that lower taxes and less regulation stimulates the economy FAR more effectively than simply ramping up government spending? By continuing to deny this simple fact, you make yourselves look even more economically illiterate than you actually are.

    Unemployment is at a 50-year low. In the first 21 months of the Trump Administration, the economy added 10 times the manufacturing jobs than were added during the last 21 months under Obama (Forbes, 10/16/18). Wages are finally on the rise after many years of stagnation. The trillions of dollars of corporate profits being repatriated from overseas due to the double taxation policies formerly in place add to the overall wealth of the nation. You do realize that stock buybacks spur on the market and result in increased wealth for anyone who has money invested in IRAs or 401Ks, right? Did you really think that the corporations were going to donate those profits to some failed Democrat wealth redistribution scheme? And how do you figure that the money is not going to create jobs? The last time I looked, most companies are hiring and falling all over themselves to recruit new applicants.

    I have to say you guys have a lot of cheek talking about "historical debt", health care costs, infrastructure, education, well, pretty much anything. Obama had eight years to address the nation's problems. The results? He doubled an already outrageous debt. He took $1 trillion that was supposed to go to "shovel ready" infrastructure projects and funneled it all to liberal organizations run by the likes of George Soros or ACORN. Name an infrastructure project that Obama oversaw. He shoved Obamacare down our throats, turning our health care system into a massive, unmanageable and hugely expensive bureaucracy and wealth redistribution system. He advocated for more education spending but only to enrich teachers' unions and to turn our public education system into a nationwide network of liberal indoctrination camps.

    You talk about people working two jobs to make ends meet. When was the last time that most American families got by on a single income? I don't have that answer but I'll tell you one thing; it was WAY before Donald Trump ever decided to run for President. People spend more now than they did when I was a kid. Spend more, work more. Sorry if that doesn't compute in your world. 

    You say Obama created hundreds of thousands of more jobs than Trump. Yes, he did.... in eight years. Trumps been at it less than 2 and a half. You're going to have a hard time defending that statement in January of 2025. As for the stock market rise, do you really have any understanding of that? Obama took over right after a monumental market collapse, the root cause of which, by the way, was Democrats' socialistic housing policies. He SHOULD have overseen a record rebound in the market (and in employment numbers, for that matter) but the only way he got it done was to force 0% interest rates for nearly his entire term, forcing money into the market that would otherwise have gone into bonds, money markets, etc. And, yes, Al, we do see all of this on conservative news outlets, including the truth about how it's done and why Obama's economic record should have been far better considering the lowly starting point. His policies stifled the recovery like none had since FDR and the Great Depression. The man, like his comrades in the Democrat Party, is either economically illiterate, doesn't care about real growth or both. 

    As for Obama's "respectable" Presidency, tell me which of these things you found "respectable". How about Fast and Furious, selling guns to Mexican drug cartels and then losing track of them, resulting the deaths of Border Patrol agents? Or the IRS scandal, weaponizing the agency to attack and harass political opponents? Maybe promising Dmitri Medvedev and Vladimir Putin "more flexibility" in arms negotiations but only after he could bamboozle Americans into re-electing him? Or would it be the Syrian "redline" on chemical weapons which he went on to say that he never said? Don't forget the Benghazi debacle and the idiotic "Muslim video" coverup. Perhaps you preferred the pallets of unmarked currency delivered in the dead of night to the Iranian mullahs along with $150 billion in frozen assets, all so we could have the privilege of allowing them to "self-inspect" their nuclear facilities. I wonder if maybe it's not the free pass for Hillary Clinton after she violated laws protecting national security that would have landed anyone else in federal prison. Maybe we should wait to see just how much involvement Obama had in the illegal spying on the Trump campaign. That will be telling. No matter how you slice it, there was nothing "respectable" about Obama or his crooked, inept and disingenuous regime. The man was a disaster for this country. The fact that so many Americans are so clueless that they still revere the traitor only underscores how much work we have to do in repairing our pathetic public education system. 
    AlofRICYDdhartaethang5
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    @Sharky I don't think I've ever read a more incorrect list of falsehoods …. unless, maybe it was a week's worth of "tweets" from you know who. 

    I'm worried about losing our democracy, and Putin defeating U.S. without firing a shot. YOU should be too.
     I'll not take up any more of your time with debate on this subject. The only text I can think of that is so far from truth would be Mein Kampf.

    I WOULD recommend one to you, available on Amazon: Dear F**king Lunatic, which would point out many of the falsehoods with fact.
    CYDdhartaethang5
  • I agree. When I was younger (14) during Obama's era, me and my parents were not particularly fans of him. He is known for the unemployment he caused, his flawed healthcare system, and the drone strikes that killed many innocents. While Trump is not the "best" president we have had, I would say he is far better. Trump is a man who does not pander to nonsense. When something important comes his way, he takes it into consideration. He is WAY tougher on illegal immigration, way tougher on jobs, and on China. He was practically the first president in HISTORY to make negotiations with the leader of North Korea, Obama couldn't even step to that.  :joy: He's a real boss, and the real deal. I definitely applaud him for not being feisty with Iran (being that they already are problematic) I just see him as being the image of an American leader. Trump just fits the image, and because he has done so well for himself, despite the constant attacks by the media, no matter how many hate him, want to hurt him, or even want him dead, I still love my goddamn president. Ever since he took office on that lovely January 20th, 2017, I've never been more proud in being an American. He's not perfect, he has many flaws being that he is inexperienced, but I personally believe he is better than Obama. I'm happy he's launched his 2020 campaign, and I will most likely vote for him again!  :smiley:
    AlofRIethang5
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? " ~Epicurus

    "Americanism not Globalism, will be our credo." ~Donald Trump

    "A communist is like a crocodile" ~Winston Churchill
  • SharkySharky 97 Pts
    @AlofRI
    AlofRI said:
    @Sharky I don't think I've ever read a more incorrect list of falsehoods …. unless, maybe it was a week's worth of "tweets" from you know who. 

    I'm worried about losing our democracy, and Putin defeating U.S. without firing a shot. YOU should be too.
     I'll not take up any more of your time with debate on this subject. The only text I can think of that is so far from truth would be Mein Kampf.


    You know who you sound like, Al? You sound exactly like every single brainwashed liberal in the country. Falsehoods? Please, give me even one specific point that I made that's false and then tell me how you reached that conclusion. 

    It's so funny that all of you are suddenly so fearful of Vladimir Putin. Where was that fear when Obama made his famous "more flexible" comment on a hot mike he didn't know was on? Where was that fear when Ted Kennedy tried to enlist the Soviet Politburo to help the Democrats defeat Reagan in 1984? You know why I have no fear of Putin, Al? It's because we finally have a President who won't stand for foreign adversaries poking at the US relentlessly without ever pushing back. If you REALLY want an example of "falsehoods" and untruths, just take a look at Democrat talking points, policy positions, campaign promises and smears of their opponents. Your party makes its entire living off of lies. 
    AlofRIethang5

  • Why not ask what is better: Vanilla ice cream or Chocolate ice cream?

    Are there any objective standards on which to evaluate the "quality" of any president?  I don't think so... Answers will always correspond to political philosophy...

    As a human being though, Obama is definitively the better man...

    You do actually make a very good point here. In regard to evaluating the quality of any president, it would have to rest on standards of subjectivity than of objectivity as far as I can see.

    The fact is that no one is infallible and that includes presidents. There are both advantages and disadvantages that come with any president that I can see just like there are with many things in general.

    But anyway, you're absolutely right, this is mostly about political philosophy.

    To a republican a good president is someone who upholds republican ideas, principles and policies while to a democrat, a good president is one who uphold democrat ideas, principles and policies... I don't think there is anyway around that, people are not naturally objective here...

    What we could do, is ask everyone to name their best Republican President and their best Democrat President... We could then cross-ref the answers according to party affiliation and I'm pretty sure, the best Democrat president list we would have from the Republican pool, will be completely different from the Democrat list of best democrat president... For instance, I suspect that a large majority of democrat would put Obama quite high, while no Republican would... The same will be true of best republican presidents list from the democrat pool compared to the republican answers ...

    The demarcation will be quite evident, right along ideology lines, it's almost mechanical... 
    ZeusAres42
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    @Sharky Obama didn't make that "flexible" remark to Putin. He said it to Medvedev when HE was "being more flexible" (i.e. more reasonable), when HE was President of Russia. Putin didn't like so he "de-elected" Medvedev and became UN-reasonable, so Obama became "less flexible". That's what ANY "American President" would do. Trump is not like ANY American President. NONE of them (including Obama), would "trust" Putin over our own patriotic security organizations. To do so is traitorous. 
    You, taking Obama's diplomacy as a negative, over Trumps obviously un-Presidential behavior, is answer enough for the rest of your thoughts on what constitutes "lies".
    CYDdharta
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    AlofRI said:
    @Sharky Obama didn't make that "flexible" remark to Putin. He said it to Medvedev when HE was "being more flexible" (i.e. more reasonable), when HE was President of Russia. Putin didn't like so he "de-elected" Medvedev and became UN-reasonable, so Obama became "less flexible". That's what ANY "American President" would do. Trump is not like ANY American President. NONE of them (including Obama), would "trust" Putin over our own patriotic security organizations. To do so is traitorous. 
    You, taking Obama's diplomacy as a negative, over Trumps obviously un-Presidential behavior, is answer enough for the rest of your thoughts on what constitutes "lies".

    No other leader in our history has abused our federal government agencies to undermine their political opponents or our national security apparatus to spy on their opposition's campaign and leak damaging information uncovered by that spying to the press in in an attempt to damage that campaign, and failing that, trying to have the newly elected president removed from office on fraudulent charges.  The 0bama administration was by far the most corrupt and deceitful administration to darken the halls of the White House in my lifetime.  Nixon was a piker compared to 0bama.  If anyone deserves to be called a traitor, it is undoubtedly 0bama.


    Plaffelvohfenethang5
  • @CYDdharta

    LOL you're delusional!!  :joy:
    CYDdhartaethang5ZeusAres42
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    @CYDdharta

    LOL you're delusional!!  :joy:

    You haven't been paying attention ... at all.  :unamused:
    Plaffelvohfen
  • SharkySharky 97 Pts
    @AlofRI

    I know the context of Obama's exchange with Medvedev, Al. Anyone paying even scant attention to the news at the time saw the clip. It was very obvious that Obama's message to the Russians, including Putin, was to be patient with him while he took care of his own political fortunes and THEN he would be more than happy to sell our country down the river- business as usual during the Obama regime. Medvedev even told Obama that he'd be sure to pass the message on to Vladimir.
    I don't know how you came up with your weird interpretation of the exchange OR your understanding of the political dynamic in Russia when Putin was ping-ponging between the Presidency and the Prime Minister's office, switching seats with Medvedev. Putin and Medvedev both loved Obama being President. They had never had their way with the United States as easily as when that inept fool occupied the White House. I'm sure if it wasn't for the 22nd Amendment, they'd probably be interfering with our elections again in an effort to get Obama re-installed as President. I'm also sure that today, the Russians are probably desperate to get rid of Trump and are crestfallen that the Democrats have turned up not just a clown car full of candidates, but a full bus. 
  • TKDBTKDB 256 Pts
    Look at the Stock Market differences?

    The day after 2016 Election, the Stock Market apparently had a resurgence?

    While Obama was in the Oval Office, apparently the Stock Market, wasn't doing so great?
  • SharkySharky 97 Pts
    @TKDB

    Actually, the stock market did quite well under Obama. However, the reasons that it did don't do anything to help make the case that he was a credible President.

    First, the market had crashed shortly before Obama was inaugurated, setting him up to occupy the White House during an epic recovery. Unfortunately for him, the real reason for the market crash was the unintended consequences of the socialistic housing policies put in place during the Clinton Administration. It's tough to take credit for a recovery when your party was responsible for the crash in the first place.

    Second, the market was given a very powerful and artificial boost thanks to eight solid years of 0% interest rates maintained by the Fed. Investors had nowhere to go with their money except into stocks. All of that money pouring into the exchanges boosted stock prices without a lot of actual economic data to back up the valuations. This explains why, during a sluggish and stubbornly slow recovery, the stock market actually outperformed. 

    None of the success was Obama's doing. 
  • ethang5ethang5 150 Pts
    Actually, if every republican was to pick who he thought was the best democrat president, and every democrat was to pick who he thought was the best republican president, more republicans would agree with the democrats choice than Democrats agreeing with the republicans choice.

    Think about it.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1793 Pts
    @Sharky

    I believe that Putin's regime is more interested in polarising presidents, than in those soft on Russia. With hardliners like George W Bush, they could still talk and make deals, keeping the status-quo, and with soft presidents they could start getting bold - but it is with controversial presidents that their hands are really untied. Trump is a very polarising figure, pitting two parties against each other and setting a lot of discord in the American society. And while Americans fight each other over strong disagreements, Putin can do whatever he wants on the international stage, knowing that his enemies' attention is diverted by the domestic matters.

    That said, I do not think Trump is what caused this polarisation; if anything, he is a mere manifestation of the already existing trend. And Obama may very well have been the one who started this trend.
    Up until Obama's term, there was an unspoken agreement between the parties: we disagree with each other on many issues, but we have common general goals and are going to work together in order to solve them. You can see it in the rhetoric of every president: they would always make it clear that they respect the members of the other party immensely and understand where they are coming from, and are willing to work together on the issues.
    Obama, however, started openly criticising Republicans, accusing them of not wanting to make the US a better place, and abusing the executive order system to get his way whenever the Congress would block his ideas.
    Trump is simply a continuation of that trend.

    It is no coincidence that Putin attacked Georgia in 2008, when it was clear that Obama almost certainly was going to become the next president - and then Ukraine in 2014, during Obama's second term. Since 2016 Putin has been much more gentle and careful, but he still causes a lot of ruckus on the international stage with his bold statements, indicating that he might just be waiting for the convenient moment to grab the next chunk of land.
  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 446 Pts

    Actually, if every republican was to pick who he thought was the best democrat president, and every democrat was to pick who he thought was the best republican president, more republicans would agree with the democrats choice than Democrats agreeing with the republicans choice.

    Think about it.

    Firstly, I actually removed the fallacy mark from your post as I actually don't agree with that system unless it is moderated because it justs invites a play of tit for tat with each party thinking they're the better independent thinker. Anyway, that's irrelevant.

    The point I want to make here is there is no way to know what you said is actually true or not without actually testing it in the first place.

    That being said, however, I actually have come across some Republicans that ironically appear more liberal than some liberals that I have come across; Neuroscientist and Republican Sam Harris come to mind for instance.


    The unexamined thought is not worth thinking.

  • TKDBTKDB 256 Pts
    @Avi12750

    What news media outlet, does Tod Perry work for?

     I'm getting the impression, that Tod Perry, is an "Opinion Journalist?"

    (Source: Tod Perry, The Daily Good)

    "Your first point is that Obama wasted 8 years of our time. However, I have to disagree with you. First off, he gave members of the LGBTQIA community the right to get married, he changed the stereotype of only old white men getting elected which made our country look better, he cut the unemployment rate in half, and he ended the war in Iraq. He ordered for the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden which Republicans can agree is a good thing, he saved the U.s auto industry, dropped the veteran homeless rate by 50%, and signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to combat pay discrimination against women. "


  • ethang5ethang5 150 Pts
    @ZeusAres42 ;

    >Firstly, I actually removed the fallacy mark from your post as I actually don't agree with that system unless it is moderated because it justs invites a play of tit for tat with each party thinking they're the better independent thinker. Anyway, that's irrelevant.

    I'm still interested in what you think the fallacy was.

    >The point I want to make here is there is no way to know what you said is actually true or not without actually testing it in the first place.

    True. But what do you think it would mean if it were true? If we are guided by the general truism that - 

    The more fair and objective a political party's choice is, the more people there will be from the opposing party who will agree with it -

    It would mean the republicans are generally more fair and objective than democrats, at least in this question.

    This is why republicans generally do not demonstrate, boycott, march, or ban free speech the way democrats commonly do.

    >That being said, however, I actually have come across some Republicans that ironically appear more liberal than some liberals that I have come across; Neuroscientist and Republican Sam Harris come to mind for instance. 

    If you get around, you will find that republicans are generally more tolerant of democrat views than the other way around. The democrat version of a Sam Harris would have to keep his thinking hidden or would be drummed out of the party.

  • @IshaanKhalap

    A half eaten, 10 day old ham sandwich is better than Obama.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch