Why the Democrat Party - Progressives - Marxists in America are servants of the Devil? - 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!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Why the Democrat Party - Progressives - Marxists in America are servants of the Devil?

Debate Information

One may ask why I consider Democrats-liberals-Marxists-Progressives-LGBTQ advocates, servants of the Devil...the reason is clear...the perverse use of Roe v. Wade (1973) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). No "normal," mature, moral, man or woman would espouse murdering babies in the womb; LGBTQ sexual perversion legitimized by Obergefell v. Hodges (2015); Transgender demonism forced upon children in school; legislation to allow little boys and grown men to pee next to little girls, women, mothers, in public restrooms; historical lies through revisionism via CRT/1619 in public schools to teach American children to hate themselves, their parents, their friends, their Nation based on skin color....there are many more examples but why go into detail? Russia-Russia-Russia....



Plaffelvohfenpiloteer



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • pamelajohnson1pamelajohnson1 113 Pts   -  
    Were you one of those who loved Donald Trump? I don't care for any politics really. I know a lot of the evangelicals were for Trump. @RickeyD
    SkepticalOne
  • anarchist100anarchist100 605 Pts   -  
    @pamelajohnson1
    Donald Trump was the first president express support for LGBT rights in his inauguration speech, he's awesome.
    SkepticalOne
  • pamelajohnson1pamelajohnson1 113 Pts   -  
    Are you sure I don't remember him ever saying anything about LGBT@anarchist100
  • anarchist100anarchist100 605 Pts   -   edited May 12
    @pamelajohnson1
    I was mistaken, it was the acceptance speech he gave after being nominated for president by the republican party.
  • pamelajohnson1pamelajohnson1 113 Pts   -  
    And that is your reason for liking Trump? @anarchist100
  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -  
    @pamelajohnson1 ; Yes, I voted for Donald Trump and if possible, I will vote for Him again...he represents policies and strategies foundational to America's sustainability. If you vote for a Democrat candidate, you are not a child of the Living God.


  • anarchist100anarchist100 605 Pts   -  
    @pamelajohnson1
    It is one of them, Trump is also far more Anti-War than his recent predecessors, likely because he's not part of the GOP establishment, like devils Bush and Cheney, who are servants of the military industrial complex, because of this Trump was a challenge to the power they held over American politics. He was not perfect, but was elected because he appealed to the people, not the corrupt GOP establishment. I think the democratic party establishment is also quite corrupt, and like the GOP is used by powerful unelected groups to control American politics, an example of someone outside of the establishment using their party to get elected was Bernie Sanders, of course the democrats saw what happened with Trump and they didn't want that happening to them, so they stole the election, and since they are not considered a government body by the government, they are able to do so legally.
  • pamelajohnson1pamelajohnson1 113 Pts   -  
    The election wasn't stolen.  Trump lost.  I don't care for any president, but Trump was the odd ball.  He lied every time he opened his mouth.  He would say something and say he didn't say it. He really didn't know what he was doing.@anarchist100
    SkepticalOne
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4521 Pts   -  
    @pamelajohnson1
    It is one of them, Trump is also far more Anti-War than his recent predecessors, likely because he's not part of the GOP establishment, like devils Bush and Cheney, who are servants of the military industrial complex, because of this Trump was a challenge to the power they held over American politics. He was not perfect, but was elected because he appealed to the people, not the corrupt GOP establishment. I think the democratic party establishment is also quite corrupt, and like the GOP is used by powerful unelected groups to control American politics, an example of someone outside of the establishment using their party to get elected was Bernie Sanders, of course the democrats saw what happened with Trump and they didn't want that happening to them, so they stole the election, and since they are not considered a government body by the government, they are able to do so legally.
    Is that why the GOP establishment is so heavily backing Trump now, to the point where no one of substance even considered running against him in the latest Primaries? Come on, friend, Trump is one of the most corrupt presidents in the history of the US, and he is in bed with the Republican Party, as it is in bed with him.
    "Outsider" means little when he stops being an outsider the moment he is elected.
    Sanders is also a deeply corrupt politician, with shady history of dating socialist regimes and flipping his stances whenever convenient. These "outsiders" are playing you, guys, pretending to be underdogs while in reality being even more corrupt than those they are supposed to punish for corruption.

    And no, no one "stole the election"; it is a story backed up by no evidence and based solely on the claim made by a guy who does not know how to lose with grace. Same happened with Bernie who accused the Democrats of "stealing the Primary"; the guy did not have the interest in figuring out how those Primaries worked and thought that he was entitled for a win based on the (likely inaccurate) perception that he had the support of the majority of voters.

    Trump and Sanders are some of the worst presidential candidates recently. It is quite telling that people like this nowadays can so easily sell their stories to the public.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar

    What a load of crap, May.  McConnell is backing Pres. Trump? McCarthy? The Lincoln Project is still active and the never-Trump media stooges are still as virulent as ever.  The most you can say about the GOPe is that the leadership avoids discussing Pres. Trump because he's more popular than they are.  Pres. Trump never stopped being the outsider because the GOPe never stopped trying to undermine him.  And contrary to your assertion, Pres. Trump is one of the least corrupt politicians to serve on a national level.  He's been under investigation since before he took office til now.  He's the most investigated President in history, yet those investigations have turned up nothing.  

    There's plenty of evidence that the election was stolen.  Watch "2000 Mules" then try claiming there is no evidence that the election was a fraud.  See also;

    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/ballot-bombshells-20-episodes-exposing-fraud-illegalities-and
    SkepticalOne
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4521 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta

    I do not know about every single Republican, but McConnell certainly has not opposed Trump's candidacy in 2020 and seems to be willing to endorse him in 2024:
    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/25/mcconnell-would-support-trump-2024-471672
    Suffice to say that there is not a single prominent member of the Republican establishment who is openly displeased with Trump. That is not how outsiders are treated in corrupt organizations.

    As for corruption, I did not imply that Trump has done anything illegal. Corruption in this context is abuse of the legal governmental power, dances with foreign dictators, and consistent caving to the domestic lobbyists.

    But if you want to talk about investigations specifically, Trump's claims that the election was "stolen" from under him have been investigated for a long time, and, again, nothing turned up that would allow anyone to legally contest the election outcome. If you want to play this game, you have to play it consistently, which you are not willing to do when it comes to Trump. Like I said, Trump and Sanders are very good at selling their stories to their target audiences who will swallow anything they say, as long as that makes them feel like a part of the elite club, different from the mainstream crowd.
  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar ; Biden, the Democrat Party, clearly stole the 2020 election.
    SkepticalOne
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar

    Yeah May, Pres. Trump and McConnell are BFFs.  You can tell from all of the Trump rallies McConnell joined.  McConnell would get booed off the stage at a Trump rally.

    No one’s detestation of Trump matches the breadth and depth of McConnell’s, which includes a professional’s disdain for a dilettante. Trump enthusiasts are as hostile to McConnell as progressives are. He is equally impervious to the disapproval of both factions.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/now-begins-mcconnells-project-to-shrink-trumps-gop-influence/2021/02/14/ff7201de-6eed-11eb-93be-c10813e358a2_story.html


    Best o' buds there, May; you sure called it.  Katko, Kinzinger, Beutler Newhouse, Valadao, Meijer, Rice, Upton, Gonzalez, and Cheney all voted to impeach Pres. Trump AFTER HE LEFT OFFICE.  Once again, the GOPe cannot be openly antagonistic to Pres Trump as his approval rating is a lot higher than that of the GOPe.


    Abuse of legal government power?  That's something that was used against Pres. Trump through the numerous bogus investigations (with the tacit approval of the GOPe) rather than something he used.  Dances with foreign dictators?  Oh, you mean diplomacy.  Caving to domestic lobbyists?  I have no idea what you're talking about, and neither do you.  Caving to domestic lobbyists is what we're currently doing by bankrolling the war in Ukraine.


    And let's see; investigations have uncovered foreign interference involving over 100,000 ballots, bribery of election officials, voter fraud, hundreds of thousands of ballots who's signatures didn't match the signatures on file, illegal drop boxes, illegals voting, the list goes on in a race that was decided by as few as 42,000 votes.  And May apes Officer Barbrady, "Nothing to see here, folks; move along".  


    You should stick to debates about religion.  I couldn't say if you're any more informed on that subject, but your knowledge certainly couldn't be any worse than it is on politics.

  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ; God Bless President Trump and sorry for you that his agenda does not include the insanity of LGBTQ-abortion....open borders, soft on crime, destroying our economy, green new deal insanity....sick puppies.
  • anarchist100anarchist100 605 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD
    Trump is pro-LGBT rights, he's has made that very clear, don't assume that just because you like him that means that he agrees with you, I bet he would find you disgusting.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD

    TBH, it isn't what they did to Pres. Trump that disgusts me; it's what they did to the American public that allows them to get away with their crap that's the real issue. 
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD

    TBH, it isn't what they did to Pres. Trump that disgusts me; it's what they did to the American public that allows them to get away with their cr@p that's the real issue. 
  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ; You mean the best economy in 50-years, energy independence, a secure southern border, healthy stock market, lower drug prices for seniors, low fuel prices, no pointless wars....what else upset you?


  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD

    That so many Americans fought against their own best interest and the best interests of the nation.
  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta ; Identify those who fought against the interest of their family and their Nation...in what way?
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @RickeyD

    Those who supported the oligarchs over Pres. Trump's agenda to secure our nation, improve our economy, and return common sense to it's proper position of prominence. 
    RickeyD
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4521 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta

    You have not countered any of the arguments I made. The facts are:

    1. McConnell said he would vote for Trump running again, and not a single prominent Republican has expressed an interest in running against him. This does not align with the "outsider" narrative; if anything, Trump appears to be the center of the party and its electorate.
    2. Trump has made a lot of flip-flops immediately after meeting with various individuals, including foreign dictators, in exchange for various promises and deals. He also has issued a large number of executive orders, bypassing the other branches of power. This is corruption and abuse of power in my book, even if it is technically allowed by the system.
    3. None of the investigations into the election of 2020 resulted in them being reconsidered, let alone found to be "stolen".

    As for what I should stick to, I think I can decide that for myself. ;) Thanks for your suggestion though.
  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -   edited May 14
    @MayCaesar ; Trump methodically guided our Nation in the way faith, prosperity, security, sustainability, while useless atheists such as yourself fought him and falsely accused him during his entire administration then you stole the election via fraud and now we're on the precipice of a third-world-war while our economy tanks, climate change fanatics rule and LGBTQ is glorified by the demonic progressives...this is sick. 
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar

    I've countered every single one of the weak cases you've tried to make.  You've a far cry from your original position that the GOPe is "heavily backing Trump".

    1. McConnell said “I think I have an obligation to support the nominee of my party, that will mean that whoever the nominee is has gone out and earned the nomination.”  That's not an endorsement, it's simply an acknowledgement of political reality.  No one of any prominence, not even Pres. Trump, has said they are certain to run in 2024.  We're too far away from that election.

    2. That's called negotiations and/or diplomacy.  They are essential duties required of every president.  As far as executive orders go, Pres Trump is #18 out of 45 US presidents,   Pres Trump issued fewer exec orders than Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon, and roughly 1/20th of FDR's of exec orders.

    3.  There is no mechanism for "reconsidering" an election.  A cast ballot is a cast ballot, there is no way of proving who a fraudulent vote went to.  That doesn't mean the election wasn't stolen.

    You are, of course, free to do as you wish.  I was just trying to give you some friendly advice as you are obviously out of your element when it comes to current politics.  Your batting average in this thread makes George McBride look like a home-run hitter.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4521 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta

    An acknowledgement of political reality and an endorsement are not mutually exclusive. McConnell is at any moment free to say, "I think that Trump is a terrible candidate that will embarrass our party, and even if he is the nominee of this party, I will oppose his candidacy".

    Yes, negotiations and diplomacy are important matters. Who and how to negotiate with, however, is also important, and I would argue that the past few presidents have been pretty awful in this respect.
    The fact that Trump issued fewer executive orders than some of the other horrible presidents does not at all challenge my claim.

    Are you saying that, if it was legally proven tomorrow that, say, the Democratic establishment hacked into the system and changed the variables so Biden won, while in reality Trump was getting 70% elector votes - then nothing would happen? 
    Even if that is the case, that still means that the investigation did not turn up anything legally enforceable, just like in case of investigations into Trump. As you yourself admitted, the fact that legally nothing was done as a consequence does not imply that the investigations did not find any wrongdoings.

    What you gave was not a "friendly" advice. Maybe that is how you talk to your friends; if so, we have very different friend circles.

  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar

    If you have a case to make, make it instead of constantly moving the goalposts.

    So, to you, anything short of McConnell slandering Pres. Trump is an endorsement?!?  That's not the meaning of the term "endorsement".  McConnell said he supports the position, Republican nominee for POTUS.  He did NOT endorse Pres. Trump.

    Consider your opinion to have been given all consideration to which it's worthy of.
    You haven't demonstrated that the issuance of executive orders equals corruption.  By that measure, FDR was by far our nation's most corrupt POTUS.  Eisenhower, Clinton, Reagan, Carter were all "more corrupt" than Pres. Trump.  Make your case.

    Of course that's what I'm saying.  Evidence of it is turning up every day.  I agree with you that the investigations turned up wrongdoings.  It all illustrates a flaw in our election system that needs to be addressed, unfortunately the Establishment is planning to take advantage of that flaw in future elections an has no intention whatsoever of fixing it.

    Sometimes the truth hurts.

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4521 Pts   -   edited May 16
    @CYDdharta

    I am making a very simple case: that Trump is not an outsider, but a member of the Republican establishment, and that he is a very corrupt president.

    No, not anything short of McConnell slandering Trump is an endorsement. But a promise to support him in case he is nominated is certainly an endorsement. When I do not want to endorse someone, I do not promise to support them. It is fairly simple.

    Yes, FDR was certainly among the most corrupt presidents in the US history (not as corrupt as Nixon though, I would say). Executive orders are just one of the metrics of corruption; it is not the only one.
    As for why executive orders equal corruption, they are an exercise of the executive power in violation of the principle of separation of powers. It is the kind of corruption that is legally allowed, yet runs against the spirit of the foundational documents of the system.

    My friend, to emotionally hurt me, you have to try far harder than that. I ran an ultra-marathon yesterday that caused me to collapse in the middle of the woods in unspeakable pain; you think you can hurt me with words after that? >:)
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar

    Is that what you attempted to do?  Other than failing to demonstrate how Pres. Trump is an insider, let alone a member of the GOPe and failing to show how he's corrupt, good job, I guess.

    The reason for posting an example is to illustrate what you mean.  If you didn't mean McConnell had to slander Pres. Trump, you should have chosen a different example.  Once again, McConnell never endorsed Pres. Trump.  He said he supports the position.  At this point, McConnell is endorsing NO ONE  If you take a dare to kiss the next person who sits on the chair in front of you while 20 people are playing musical chairs, when the music stops, does that mean you really wanted to kiss Charlie?  His beard is really scratchy. 

    Moving the goalposts again.  If you didn't want to use executive orders as a measure of corruption, you should have chosen something else.
    The delegation of authority of the chief executive to various executive agencies is corruption?

    What are you going on about?  I'm not trying to hurt you, I'm trying to help you.  Generally you have some of the best arguments on the site, but you're striking out here.
  • Were you one of those who loved Donald Trump? I don't care for any politics really. I know a lot of the evangelicals were for Trump. @RickeyD
    You are slowly winning me over, Mrs. Pam. I believe you are a Christian and on that we disagree, but I have to say your are infinitely more reasonable and rational than your fellow believer RickyD. Thank you!
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • @RickeyD

    One may ask why I consider Democrats-liberals-Marxists-Progressives-LGBTQ advocates, servants of the Devil...the reason is clear...the perverse use of Roe v. Wade (1973) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). No "normal," mature, moral, man or woman would espouse murdering babies in the womb; LGBTQ sexual perversion legitimized by Obergefell v. Hodges (2015); Transgender demonism forced upon children in school; legislation to allow little boys and grown men to pee next to little girls, women, mothers, in public restrooms; historical lies through revisionism via CRT/1619 in public schools to teach American children to hate themselves, their parents, their friends, their Nation based on skin color....there are many more examples but why go into detail? Russia-Russia-Russia....

    It is amazing you can string that many words together and still not make any sense. Impressive, sir!

    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • RickeyD said:
    @MayCaesar ; Biden, the Democrat Party, clearly stole the 2020 election.
    If by stole, you mean consistently established legitimate, then yes, I agree. If you really think the election was stolen from Trump you've been listening to individuals who have a vested interest in deception so that they may maintain their own power at the expense of the American people. (ie. You) Check your sources for bias.
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne

    If you really think the election was legitimate, you've been listening to individuals who have a vested interest in deception so that they may maintain their own power at the expense of the American people. (ie. You) Check your sources for bias.
  • CYDdharta said:
    @SkepticalOne

    If you really think the election was legitimate, you've been listening to individuals who have a vested interest in deception so that they may maintain their own power at the expense of the American people. (ie. You) Check your sources for bias.
    So, Trump selected judges are trying to 'maintain their power'?!  A Republican Secretary of State going against POTUS is trying to 'maintain his power'?! Cyber Ninjas run by a hard-core Trump cultist is trying to 'maintain its power'?! The Supreme Court of the United States with a Conservative super majority is just trying to 'maintain its power?!

    Seriously, my good man, I've got sources that should favor your view saying 'legitimate' or at the very least, 'no evidence'. The only people still claiming fraud are conspiracy theorists or people looking for Trump's endorsement. 
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4521 Pts   -   edited May 17
    CYDdharta said:
    @MayCaesar

    Is that what you attempted to do?  Other than failing to demonstrate how Pres. Trump is an insider, let alone a member of the GOPe and failing to show how he's corrupt, good job, I guess.

    The reason for posting an example is to illustrate what you mean.  If you didn't mean McConnell had to slander Pres. Trump, you should have chosen a different example.  Once again, McConnell never endorsed Pres. Trump.  He said he supports the position.  At this point, McConnell is endorsing NO ONE  If you take a dare to kiss the next person who sits on the chair in front of you while 20 people are playing musical chairs, when the music stops, does that mean you really wanted to kiss Charlie?  His beard is really scratchy. 

    Moving the goalposts again.  If you didn't want to use executive orders as a measure of corruption, you should have chosen something else.
    The delegation of authority of the chief executive to various executive agencies is corruption?

    What are you going on about?  I'm not trying to hurt you, I'm trying to help you.  Generally you have some of the best arguments on the site, but you're striking out here.
    I have never claimed that he is an insider. Instead, I have claimed that he is not an outsider and, rather, an entrenched member and even the center of the party. I have provided an argument in support of this claim. Saying that I "failed" to demonstrate something does not constitute a counter-argument.

    No, that does not mean that I really wanted to kiss Charlie, but it does mean that I endorsed kissing Charlie. If I said that any lady approaching me would become my date, then I would endorse dating any lady. Similarly, McConnell endorsed Trump for president, regardless of his personal feelings towards him. Once again, he was fully free to take an anti-Trump stance and say that he would not support his nomination, regardless of the opinions of the rest of the establishment. That would be a perfectly valid and reasonable position in the assumption that McConnell really opposes Trump.

    I said that overuse of executive orders is one measure of corruption; it is not the only measure.

    You said that "sometimes the truth hurts". I replied by explaining that your words cannot hurt me, because I have been hurt by certain things bad enough that they are nothing in comparison. I am not sure what is so confusing here...
  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne ; Again, the Devil blinds the mind of his servants that they might not consider their hopelessness and futility....you are one such example.


  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne ;  Democrats stole and lied and cheated and manipulated and forged their way into the insanity that now rules our Nation but you're too brainwashed and effeminate in soul to understand. You exemplify death to America.

     
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne Gold Premium Member 1427 Pts   -   edited May 17
    @RickeyD

    Again, the Devil blinds the mind of his servants that they might not consider their hopelessness and futility....

    I really thought you were referring to yourself for a sec there....

    Democrats stole

    ...not according to SCOTUS, Trump appointed federal judges, Republican secretary of state or even the "cyber ninjas". You've been gaslit, my friend. It was Trump trying to steal the election by any means necessary....falsely claiming fraud before the election even began and before it was over, trying to get valid votes thrown out, hopelessly challenging election procedures and results in court, and even stoking an insurrection.  It wasn't the Democrats stealing the election, buddy.


    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • RickeyDRickeyD 770 Pts   -   edited May 17
    @SkepticalOne ;  Trump appointed Federal Judges to buffer the insanity of your party of demons seeking to legislate from the bench and circumvent the democratic process via the legislature.

     
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    So, Trump selected judges are trying to 'maintain their power'?!  A Republican Secretary of State going against POTUS is trying to 'maintain his power'?! Cyber Ninjas run by a hard-core Trump cultist is trying to 'maintain its power'?! The Supreme Court of the United States with a Conservative super majority is just trying to 'maintain its power?!

    Seriously, my good man, I've got sources that should favor your view saying 'legitimate' or at the very least, 'no evidence'. The only people still claiming fraud are conspiracy theorists or people looking for Trump's endorsement. 
    No; aside from the cyber ninjas, the people you mentioned are trying to keep from getting killed and having their houses burned to the ground by the Dems stormtroopers. They're on the verge of burning down the houses of supreme court justices for upholding the Constitution.  The cyber ninjas found 50,000 votes that shouldn't have been counted in a state that Biden won by 10,000.

    That election was a fraud.  There's too much evidence to deny it.  Your guy won, so no amount of evidence will get you to admit it.
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1779 Pts   -  
    MayCaesar said:

    I have never claimed that he is an insider. Instead, I have claimed that he is not an outsider and, rather, an entrenched member and even the center of the party. I have provided an argument in support of this claim. Saying that I "failed" to demonstrate something does not constitute a counter-argument.

    No, that does not mean that I really wanted to kiss Charlie, but it does mean that I endorsed kissing Charlie. If I said that any lady approaching me would become my date, then I would endorse dating any lady. Similarly, McConnell endorsed Trump for president, regardless of his personal feelings towards him. Once again, he was fully free to take an anti-Trump stance and say that he would not support his nomination, regardless of the opinions of the rest of the establishment. That would be a perfectly valid and reasonable position in the assumption that McConnell really opposes Trump.

    I said that overuse of executive orders is one measure of corruption; it is not the only measure.

    You said that "sometimes the truth hurts". I replied by explaining that your words cannot hurt me, because I have been hurt by certain things bad enough that they are nothing in comparison. I am not sure what is so confusing here...
    Pres. Trump isn't an insider, but he's the center of the party?!?   What are you going on about?  The topic wasn't donuts, it was the GOP Establishment.  Saying you failed after I've demonstrated how each of your arguments is a failure does constitute a counter-argument. 

    endorse

    1  Declare one's public approval or support of.

    You cannot endorse a person without uniquely identifying them.  McConnell never declared his approval or support of Pres. Trump, merely his support and approval of the position.  Since it is anyone's guess who will ultimately be the Republican nominee, it's ridiculous to try to argue that McConnell endorses anyone, least of all Pres. Trump, whom he loathes. 


    Right, you tried to move the goalposts again when I showed you that your example was fatally flawed.


    I said the truth hurts.  I didn't say words hurt, nor did I try to hurt you with words.

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4521 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta

    Adding exclamation marks and emotional language has zero effect on me. If you have a logical objection to my argument, make your case.

    McConnell did uniquely identify Trump in his statement: he named him explicitly. This constitutes an endorsement of his candidacy. I have never said or implied that Trump is the only person McConnell has endorsed, but he is a person he has endorsed.

    I do not "move the goalposts"; we are not playing soccer here.

    Truth must be expressed with words. If words do not hurt, then truth cannot hurt either.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 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
Terms of Service

Get In Touch