#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
Paste this URL into an email or IM: |
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
|
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
|
Would you like Trump to be our first dictator?
Uhhh, NO
Side Score: 37
|
Trump can do no wrong
Side Score: 20
|
|
1
point
0
points
President Barack Obama still believes in the message of “hope and change” he campaigned on in 2008 — so much so that he believes it could have delivered him a third term over Donald Trump had the Constitution allowed him to run again. “I am confident in this vision because I’m confident that if I — if I had run again and articulated it, I think I could’ve mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it,” Obama told his former senior adviser, David Axelrod, on Monday’s “Axe Files” podcast. “I know that in conversations that I’ve had with people around the country, even some people who disagreed with me, they would say the vision, the direction that you point towards is the right one.” So was Obama a Dream DICKTATOR in your view ????????????? Side: Trump can do no wrong
|
If I have to give you the quotes, that are many, YOU are watching the network that protects Trump. You don't want facts, keep watching. Well, here's a couple: "We fell in love"; He writes me beautiful letters!" (Kim) He's a very strong leader! [I believe HIM, not my intelligence services] (Putin) MBS STRONGLY denies he had anything to do with [killing an American citizen] and you have to consider that. I believe him.
Then there's the Philippine dictator (that says he isn't one), again "He's a very strong leader" "He's doing great things for his country … as he kills hundreds. I take back the "all dictators". The Venezuelan one he doesn't seem to like, but then, he needs a distraction, so, "we'll see what happens". Bottom line, he HATES democracy, he hates our Constitution and he "says it in so many words" IF you're willing to listen! Side: Uhhh, NO
AL you just cannot pay attention because you are a DUMB ASS but you cannot help that ! Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the two most unpopular presidential candidates ever – so why can’t Barack Obama stay on for a third term? The 22nd amendment of the United States constitution, ratified in 1951, states: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice”. And if someone takes over as President for two years or more, such as when Vice President Gerald Ford stepped in after President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1973, they can then only be re-elected once. President Obama acknowledged this as he dropped his microphone and said “Obama out” at his final White House correspondents’ dinner earlier this year. But he has also said he thinks he would stand a chance of being re-elected if he were allowed to run. “I think if I ran I could win. But I can’t,” he said in a speech during his 2015 Africa tour, according to NPR. “No one person is above the law, not even the president.” Your wannbe DICKTATOR has a lot of disappointment in his words !!!!!! Side: Uhhh, NO
0
points
What did your PET NIGGER wannbe DICKTATOR say AL ?????????? President Barack Obama still believes in the message of “hope and change” he campaigned on in 2008 — so much so that he believes it could have delivered him a third term over Donald Trump had the Constitution allowed him to run again. “I am confident in this vision because I’m confident that if I — if I had run again and articulated it, I think I could’ve mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it,” Obama told his former senior adviser, David Axelrod, on Monday’s “Axe Files” podcast. “I know that in conversations that I’ve had with people around the country, even some people who disagreed with me, they would say the vision, the direction that you point towards is the right one.” Did your PET NIGGER have a vision of the future being a DICKTATOR ?????????? Side: Uhhh, NO
You are a FUCKIN STUPID TROLL that knows nothing but your fear consumes you !!!!!!! https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/ President Barack Obama still believes in the message of “hope and change” he campaigned on in 2008 — so much so that he believes it could have delivered him a third term over Donald Trump had the Constitution allowed him to run again. “I am confident in this vision because I’m confident that if I — if I had run again and articulated it, I think I could’ve mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it,” Obama told his former senior adviser, David Axelrod, on Monday’s “Axe Files” podcast. “I know that in conversations that I’ve had with people around the country, even some people who disagreed with me, they would say the vision, the direction that you point towards is the right one.” You FUCKIN DUMB ASS your PET NIGGER wanted to become a DICKTATOR !!!!!!!!!! Side: Uhhh, NO
If he had violated the Constitution just once, he would have already been impeached. And we are all waiting patiently for that marvelous even to unfold. It is his right to declare a national emergency Sure, it's his right to hit the button and nuke other countries, too. That doesn't mean it's the appropriate action of a President. Side: Uhhh, NO
And we are all waiting patiently for that marvelous even to unfold. That's sad to hear. The marvelous event that's about to unfold is the total humiliation of MSM propaganda channels and probably some investigastions into the real crimes of the FBI, like FISA warrant perjury. Sure, it's his right to hit the button and nuke other countries, too. National emergency has been declared in the US many times in the past, including by Barack Obama. This is the first time I hear someone compare it to nuclear war. Side: Uhhh, NO
That's sad to hear. Yes, it would be sad to hear a President gets impeached for treason. But, if that's what he did, then he should he go to prison, too. National emergence has been declared in the US many times in the past True, and there is a list of them, all being valid except for this one from Trump. Side: Uhhh, NO
Yes, it would be sad to hear a President gets impeached for treason It would indeed, but I was implying that it's sad to hear there are some people in the US still waiting for this "marvelous event" to unfold as a result of Mueller's investigation. What's about to unfold is something completely different. True, and there is a list of them, all being valid except for this one from Trump. Is there any statute that defines what a valid national emergency is? Side: Uhhh, NO
I would suspect that any national emergency would be valid if indeed there were an emergency threat to the US. There wasn't. If that is actually true, then it's a unique phenomena that should be studied by scientists. Because everywhere else in the world, such situations on the border do create serious threats to national security. Side: Uhhh, NO
Okay, what are the situations that are serious threats to national security exactly? A poorly defended border, almost non-existant in some places. Next to a country with one of the highest murder rates in the world, ruled almost entirely by rutheless drug cartels. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
A poorly defended border, almost non-existant in some places. Next to a country with one of the highest murder rates in the world, ruled almost entirely by rutheless drug cartels. You forgot to mention that the US supplies these "ruthless drug cartels" with all of their weaponry (because of the ridiculous US gun laws) and the market for all their drugs (because of the ridiculous US drug laws). Hence, when one looks at it this way, you're effectively blaming Mexico for a problem created by the United States. Side: Uhhh, NO
Next to a country with one of the highest murder rates in the world, ruled almost entirely by rutheless drug cartels. I would suspect that illegal immigrants are going on killing sprees in the US, yet native US citizens do much more crime. Perhaps, the sprees are happening at the border, hence the need to declare a national emergency? What am I missing here? Of course, if those drug cartels are ruthless and have a lot of money, do you think a wall is going to stop them? I'm pretty sure they can afford ladders. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
Of course, if those drug cartels are ruthless and have a lot of money, do you think a wall is going to stop them? I'm pretty sure they can afford ladders. Tunnels you idiot. What good is a ladder going to be if they have to get down the other side? Plus, the top of the wall is almost certainly going to contain some form of razor wire. Side: Uhhh, NO
I would suspect that illegal immigrants are going on killing sprees in the US, yet native US citizens do much more crime. First of all, illegal immigrants do actually commit more crime in proportion to their population. Second, this is not so much about who commits more crime. When crime is comimted by US criminal gangs, it is possible at least in theory to track them down and prosecute them. If there are criminal gangs which use an open unprotected border as part of their logistics system, then their activity essentially becomes a black box and a potential source of infinite crime. Of course, if those drug cartels are ruthless and have a lot of money, do you think a wall is going to stop them? I'm pretty sure they can afford ladders. First of all, by saying this you are only strengthening the case for declaring a national emergency. If these gangs are so hellbent on abusing the unprotected border. Second - it's true that no barrier can stop a determined assault, even the Maginot line could not stop German panzer armies. A typical appartment door will not stop a maniac from entering your appartment, but nobody sells appartments without doors based on that reasoning. A physical barrier on the border can serve as a serious deterrent, thus significantly reducing the amount of illegal border crossings. If the enemy has to cross your barrier, then you have the initiative. Motion trackers, cameras, razor wire, electric wire, and even flashbang grenades can be mounted on top of the wall. These would not cost a lot of money but be extremely effective. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
So do black people. Are you suggesting we declare black people a national emergency? Scroll the text 5 millilmeters and that's where you'll find the second part of my statement "Secondly, this isn't so much about who commits more crime". I know, paying attention to what your opponent says reauires a superhuman effort on your side. Additionally, these black people are US citizens and the criminals I was talking about are foreigners who are illegally crossing the border. There is no comparision between these two situations. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
Scroll the text 5 millilmeters and that's where you'll find the second part of my statement You are just SOOOOOOO stupid. The second part of your statement doesn't have any relevance when it is the first part of your statement I am criticising. Shut your ridiculously stupid mouth you fucking moron. You literally believe 2 = -2. That's how stupid you are. You need to be BANNED from having an opinion, because you are simply too stupid to use your right to have one responsibly. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
Secondly, this isn't so much about who commits more crime" But you literally just said it was by claiming immigrants have a higher rate of committing crime. If it wasn't relevant then why did you mention it in the first place you IMBECILE? You wanted to sneak a quick half-truth in, but you didn't want to be called out on it or have to answer any counter-arguments, so you made a claim and then immediately declared your own claim "unimportant", hence contradicting your very reference to it in the first place! Side: Uhhh, NO
illigal immigrants do actually commit more crime in proportion to their population. Not according to the statistics. When crime is comimted by US criminal gangs, it is possible at least in theory to track them down and prosecute them. Yet, it's far easier to track down illegal immigrants considering the US gangs have far more money and resources to stay hidden. you are only strengthening the case for declaring a national emergency. If these gangs are so hellbent on abusing the unprotected border. Yet, the entire point to this exercise in logistics would show that a wall would never stop them. In fact, they have far more effective ways to ship drugs into the country, just like they do in any other country. A wall is a waste of money, resources and time. A physical barrier on the border can serve as a serious deterrent, thus significantly reducing the amount of illegal border crossings. "During fiscal 2018, which ran through the end of September, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehended 396,579 undocumented immigrants at the southern border. That figure is lower than the 413,377 average yearly apprehensions during former President Barack Obama’s time in office and only a fraction of the 1,643,679 apprehensions in 2000, when Bill Clinton was in office." Motion trackers, cameras, razor wire, electric wire, and even flashbang grenades can be mounted on top of the wall. These would not cost a lot of money but be extremely effective. Do you have any supporting evidence to show they would be extremely effective? Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
First of all, by saying this you are only strengthening the case for declaring a national emergency. There is no case for a national emergency you fucking neo-Nazi retard. Shut your fucking stupid mouth. You're literally a goddamned idiot. Trump declared a national emergency to obtain funding for one of his campaign promises. Your efforts to metamorphose that into Trump declaring a national emergency because there is actually a national emergency are blatantly fabricated, since they contradict directly the historical record (i.e. the flow of news reports on the situation). Side: Uhhh, NO
Btw BigOats, while we may not agree on certain topics, which is fine, I want you to know that whatever the discussion brings, I will certainly never stoop to this course of action demonstrated by Burritto when he says this to you... "...you fucking neo-Nazi retard. Shut your fucking stupid mouth. You're literally a goddamned idiot." Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
1
point
1
point
-3
points
A brain dead narco addict like yourself has no agency in determining who is and who isn't "stupid". This is very evidently a straw man argument, since I made no claims of determination. I am merely an observer who has observed your atrociously stupid, self-contradictory claims. You seem to believe that complex wording can hide stupidity. It honestly can't. Side: Uhhh, NO
left and right are rather irrelevant when it comes to lunacy. I still have to admit that this kind of behaviour is much more prevalent on the left. The left does have some valid points and these psychotic idiots prevent them form being conveyed properly to the right. Burritto is simply bat shit crazy. There's no disputing this. Side: Uhhh, NO
-3
points
There's no disputing this. False. I am disputing it on these grounds:- A) Goldtop is an intellectually deficient imbecile who has been rabid since I proved he doesn't have a "degree in songwriting from Berkeley". B) You are an intellectually deficient imbecile who has been rabid since I proved t does not equal minus t. Side: Uhhh, NO
-3
points
which you told me was "completely false bullshit". Saying that electric and magnetic fields can be REPLACED by vector and scalar potential, is completely false bullshit, and any physicist will tall you that. That would be a mathematical error. B is replaced not by A, it is replaced by rot A. The rotor of the vector potential. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
Saying that electric and magnetic fields can be REPLACED by vector and scalar potential, is completely false bullshit, and any physicist will tall you that. You saw the part where I just told you (again) that the line was cut and pasted from the Wikipedia page on Lorentz transformations, right? God, why are you soooooooooo stupid? It's ridiculous. Side: Uhhh, NO
You saw the part where I just told you (again) that the line was cut and pasted from the Wikipedia page on Lorentz transformations, right? What this means is that the wiki article is fucked up. You should rely less on copy paste and more on using your brain, that is if you have one. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
If that is actually true, then it's a unique phenomena that should be studied by scientists. You are a unique phenomena that should be studied by scientists. The depth of stupidity you put on display is a sight of pure wonder. Because everywhere else in the world, such situations on the border do create serious threats to national security. Firstly, imbecile, if something is the case somewhere else, that does not necessarily make it the case everywhere. Secondly, imbecile, the Mexican army is not trying to invade. Trump literally declared border jumpers a national emergency. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
"Us"? I wasnt talking to you bitch. What I said was based in common sense, something that a narco addict or a CNN reporter intristically lack. You "disputed" me by deflecting from the topic entirely. Who is providing the weapons for Mexican drug lord is a different issue. One that will be solved when the leaders of FBI and CIA are indicted, those very same "wonderful" men and women that have been using their position to violate US law and target the acting President for political reasons. Side: Trump can do no wrong
1
point
National emergency has been declared in the US many times in the past, including by Barack Obama A fake national emergency is a fake national emergency, whoever declares it you shockingly retarded partisan nitwit. If you start gassing Jews in your basement, is that OK on the grounds that it's been done in the past, including by Hitler? You sir, are among the 90 percent of this website which should be outright barred from having an opinion on anything except sport. Side: Uhhh, NO
A fake national emergency is a fake national emergency, whoever declares The emergency is real, you have declared that it's a fake, but you being a fake yourself, your opinion on this issue has 0 significance. You sir, are among the 90 percent of this website which should be outright barred from having an opinion on anything except sport Well go ahead and try doing it, you retarded faggot. Your muslim fuck buddies won't save you, if that's what you're hoping for. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
1
point
That was a standard substitution. Ahahahahahahaha! Oh God, you are just so UNFATHOMABLY stupid. Here are the Google search results for your "standard substitution":- The first entry is a music video called "The T" from an artist called Alaska Thunderfuck. It is just literally MIND-BLOWING that you, a self-declared adult, are sitting on the internet trying to convince people that 2 = -2. You are BEYOND stupid. The word has not even been invented for what you are yet. Side: Trump can do no wrong
Here are the Google search results for your "standard substitution":- This is the very first google search result for such a query: https://www.google.com/ It seems your google search preferences are significantly affected by your amount of googling anal sex related topics. Hense the Alaska Thunderfuck that appeared so promptly in your search results. It is just literally MIND-BLOWING that you, a self-declared adult, are sitting on the internet trying to convince people that 2 = -2. You are BEYOND stupid Sure, everything you fail to understand is just that, "beyond stupid". Why are you behaving like a dumb bimbo? Is it because you're actually a transgender pretending to be a man? Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
https://www.google.com/ Which obviously contains no references to the stupid and mathematically impossible equation t = -t1, since the equation t = -t1 is a mathematical contradiction of itself. It seems your google search preferences are significantly affected by your amount of googling anal sex related topics. Hense the Alaska Thunderfuck that appeared so promptly in your search results. Neither Alaska Thunderfuck nor YouTube (where her video is hosted) has anything to do with anal sex. Tell me more about how 2 = -2 you ridiculously stupid cunt. Side: Trump can do no wrong
Which obviously contains no references Right, so you were lying about the "first result". I understand that lying is something that comes naturally to Bolshevics. since the equation t = -t1 is a mathematical contradiction of itself. Acting out an Alzheimer clown again Nom? You know perfectly well that t1 in all of my posts, meant a different variable. You are an infunny clown, of the sort that appear in horror movies. Your "debate" where you posted your fantasies about staking and burning people and said it was a "joke", furthers this analogy. Tell me more about how 2 = -2 I will have to ask your phychiatrist why you have this monomaniac idea. Side: Uhhh, NO
-3
points
Right, so you were lying about the "first result". Oh just stop you fucking idiot. I Googled "t = -t1", described by yourself as a "standard substitution". I lied about nothing. Obviously I don't have to lie because I am not the one of us trying to convince the world that 2 = -2. That's you. Acting out an Alzheimer clown again Nom? That doesn't even make grammatical sense. Like everything else you write, it's completely stupid nonsense. Side: Trump can do no wrong
Obviously I don't have to lie because I am not the one of us trying to convince the world that 2 = -2. That's you That's an idiot's understanding of what I wrote. The more you insist on this, the more you will reveal your idiocy th the world. Good luck! Like everything else you write, it's completely stupid nonsense. You are feigning Alzheimer every time you pretend to "forget" that t1 is a variable name, after being told so 20 times over. This clown act is a retard's idea of enterntainment. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
That's an idiot's understanding of what I wrote. That is literally what you wrote. They don't call maths a universal language for nothing you pathetic little child. Variables are direct representations of mathematical values (i.e. numbers) and there is no number which currently exists in the universe which can be inputted into your equation to make it work. You are, quite literally, more stupid than a packet of cashew nuts. You don't know when to shut your mouth because you are an idiot, and this is exactly what led to you making this amusing error in the first place. Side: Trump can do no wrong
1
point
That means you can't even escape your own idiocy by abusing semantics The only idiot here is you. It's a very common notation on sites without subscripts. Like the way it's used here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/ Why don't you go to these forums and tell them they are all idiots writing "impossble equations". See how quickly tou ass will be kicked out of there. Everyone except total retards understand that in thesse cases t1 or t2 stand for variables with subindexes. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
The only idiot here is you. It's a very common notation on sites without subscripts. No, I assure you that the idiot here is you. It is not very common to use subscripts without informing anybody else what those subscripts represent or indeed even where they should fall in regards to the baselines. You are quite simply an absolute fucking moron who is lying himself into a hole he can't escape out of. Side: Trump can do no wrong
It is not very common to use subscripts without informing anybody else what those subscripts represent or indeed even where they should fall in regards to the baselines. It's quite common when it's obvious from the context AS I HAVE ALREADY SHOWN YOU. No one in the links I have provided, was yapping their mouth about how "t1,t2,t3,t4,t5" are "idiocy" and any such person would be regarded a total clown. Now I can see why you could fail to understand what t1 meant the first time I used it, because you've never visited math forums nor would you ever need to. But I specifically explained to you that I was using an indexed variable, which is a synonym of subscripted variable, MORE THAN 20 TIMES OVER. After that, your idiotic statement that I was implying t multiplied by 1, as a way of scoring some "points", was nothng more that a retarded clown act on your part. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
It's quite common when it's obvious from the context If it were obvious then I would not be asking you to explain it, hence your argument is a contradiction of itself, and furthermore intends to project onto me your responsibility to clearly explain what you mean when you write things. You are quite frankly even more stupid than I gave you credit for if you think you can write a bunch of incomprehensible algebraic gobbledegook and then claim it to be "obvious from the context". You did not explain to anybody why you were modifying the value of t, what the modified value of t represented, where the number you used should fall with relation to the baseline, or anything else which would be required in order for ANYBODY to know what you were talking about. Hence, again, one must draw the conclusion that you are an exhaustively stupid liar. Side: Trump can do no wrong
1
point
Why don't you go to these forums and tell them they are all idiots writing "impossble equations". I will certainly do that if you can find me a single example of anybody stupid enough to have claimed t = -t1. The problem of course is that you cannot find anybody that stupid on any forum, because the only person that stupid is you. I'm going to type this in bold letters this time, so that it hopefully penetrates that utterly retarded head of yours. THERE IS NO NUMBER IN THE KNOWN UNIVERSE WHICH CAN BE INPUTTED INTO YOUR EQUATION AS THE VALUE OF T, IN WHICH YOUR EQUATION WORKS. NO NUMBER IN THE KNOWN UNIVERSE. HENCE, YOUR EQUATION IS MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE. DOES THAT COMPUTE YOU ABSURDLY STUPID HALFWIT? Side: Trump can do no wrong
I will certainly do that if you can find me a single example of anybody stupid enough to have claimed t = -t1 It's not a "claim" you retard, it's a variable substitution. Variable t1 is a function of variable t, in this case a very simple one. THAT'S WHAT SUBSTITUTIONS ARE IN MATH It's only "stupid" to a dumb twit or a transitioned tranny like yourself. THERE IS NO NUMBER IN THE KNOWN UNIVERSE WHICH CAN BE INPUTTED INTO YOUR EQUATION AS THE VALUE OF T IT ISN"T EN "EQUATION", IT'S A DEFINITION OF A NEW VARIABLE WHICH IS A FUNCTION OF THE OLD ONE. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
It's not a "claim" you retard, it's a variable substitution. No, you impossibly stupid mental health case, it was not a "variable substitution". A variable must always be equal to its own value, and in your impossible equation the variable t is not equal to its own value. IT ISN"T EN "EQUATION" t = -t1 is an equation. Stop being such an impossibly stupid retard. Equation: a statement that the values of two mathematical expressions are equal Side: Trump can do no wrong
A variable must always be equal to its own value, and in your impossible equation the variable t is not equal to its own value Since you're obviously dumb as a brick, I'll give anopther example of variable substitution: x = x1 - V*t1 t = t1 Are you now going to say that x in my formula "is not equal to itself"? This is just a means of evaluating your levels of imbecillity. If you start jerking off to that formula like you did in the previous case, then you're clinically insane. It is generally ill advised to argue with clinically insane people. t = -t1 is an equation It wasn't an equation in the sense that it needed solving. It was a definition of a function, just like Y=X^2+X+1 is a definition of a function. If you continue to mastubate your dick instead of using your brain, this converstaion is over. Side: Uhhh, NO
1
point
Since you're obviously dumb as a brick, I'll give anopther example of variable substitution For the FIFTH TIME, t = -t1 is not a "variable substitution". It is a mathematical statement that the value of t is equal to the value of minus t, which is impossible. Is there simply no end to your utter, jaw-dropping stupidity? Are you now going to say that x in my formula "is not equal to itself"? I am going to patiently repeat what I just wrote, which is that a variable must always be equal to its own value, otherwise it is not the same variable. Therefore, it is mathematically impossible for t = -t1. Side: Trump can do no wrong
1
point
Aside from how much would be different if she didn't have to gain votes or pander to certain parties in order to stay in power (as a dictator), let's assume for this argument's sake that she's the same Hillary we know today even in her policies... The answer to your question would be; They're welcome to come to the US and allied nations of the US, immigrating freely unless with the regime or with ISIL/ISIS. Before you say 'enjoy the terrorism in your nation then' you must do some research and see that terrorists are 12/13 times 'homegrown'. The 1/13 were actually the Russian-born nail-bomber brothers and the guys who carried out 9/11. Side: Uhhh, NO
Darling BigOats Please don't call me that, I respect your right to be gay but not your right to address me in this way. welcome those that run and scream from the regime with open arms, you are the Party entitled to do that. It's a well known fact that during the whole course of the Syrian civil war, 90% of the internal migration was from "rebel" territory into "regime" territory. I can give you the UN data if you so insist. And now that the war is almost over, the refugees are returning to their country, not into Idlib which is still being held by Takrifi maniacs. Because the "rebels" are a 1000 times worse that the Syrian government. Side: Uhhh, NO
|