CreateDebate


Debate Info

370
292
Yes No
Debate Score:662
Arguments:595
Total Votes:711
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (326)
 
 No (265)

Debate Creator

MrOKeefe(27) pic



Does Andrew Jackson deserve to be on the $20 bill?

Does Andrew Jackson deserve a place of honor in our national psyche?  Do his political achievements outweigh his moral failures?  Use the evidence you gathered to defend your position.

Yes

Side Score: 370
VS.

No

Side Score: 292
3 points

Jackson should be on the $20 dollar because he did many great things to benefit the U.S.

Side: Yes
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
2 points

He did not benefit the US. He caused the US to go into a depression.

Side: No
browncn(14) Disputed
2 points

He did what the people wanted. It wasn't entirely his fault that we went into a depression. The people wanted a National Bank so he made it happen.

Side: Yes
1 point

The longest one in US History. This is for the 50 characters

Side: No
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He was not because he ordered his workers to whip his slaves if they didn't do enough work which is wrong.

Side: No
browncn(14) Disputed
2 points

That may be wrong from our stand point from this day in age, but you have to remember that that was the norm of his time. It's like when we were young we had webkins they were cool. Then it was cool to have fake feathers in our hair. In the 1800's it was cool to have slaves. It was the thing to have and he, being a man of authority had slaves. Him having slaves had no affect on his ability to be a great president.

Side: Yes
burnettedf(20) Disputed
2 points

basically every president before him had slaves just sayin'

not saying its right though

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

He also did many terrible things and handled things completely irrationally. For example, after the court ruled that native americans could stay where they were, he went on a removed them and made them walk long distances and a lot of them died.

Side: No
browncn(14) Disputed
1 point

That also is something that is seen as wrong to us because we know the end result. He was trying to help his people and give them a home they could be proud of and the Natives, being the black sheep of their nation, were soiling the land they called home. Also how was he supposed to know that many of them would die? He didn't have a magic ball, he could see the future!

Side: Yes
-1 points

I agree with Taylor, not only was it irrational, but it was illegal. When people break the law they are punished in some way, right? Jackson broke the law and he was rewarded by having his face put on a $20 bill. I don't think that he should be on there. He should have been punished.

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
0 points

Jackson also did many things that harmed the U.S. more than helped. Jackson was not thinking of everyone when he made decisions. He was careless and power-hungry. His methods were violent and unnecessary.

Side: No
ariyonamcm(25) Disputed
1 point

We love to talk about the many bad things he did, but what about the Good that he's done for the country? Did you know that Andrew Jackson fought for our country, and was respected amongst many? He was the president, there are going to be things he's done wrong, I mean he had the weight on his shoulders.

Side: No
heyme(18) Disputed
-1 points

He did more things that hurt the US than things that benefited them.

Side: No
browncn(14) Disputed
2 points

Do you have examples because I think he did much more to benefit the US then hurt us.

Side: Yes
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
-1 points

He did more things that would hurt the US rather than to benefit them

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
2 points

That's what you say but I see many great things he did for America. He got rid of national debt, gave his people more land for food and stood up for what they wanted in government. There may have been some bumps and bruises along the way but he still did his best. He tried and sometimes when you try you mess up but when he did he tried to fix it. When the tariffs were too high for the south he passed a new one that was lower. He did what he thought was best as president.

Side: Yes
3 points

Jackson actually got rid of the national debt, which no other president did!

Side: Yes
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
0 points

It was only for a period of time though. It's not like he got completely rid of it

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
3 points

But he tried. How many other presidents have worked that hard to get rid of the National debt and succeeded? He did everything he could to get rid of it. It got messed up after that and that's not his fault. Time has gone on and some presidents work to get rid of the national debt and others don't but it's not the presidents that tried fault because at least they tried. Jackson tried and succeeded.

Side: Yes
petersag(22) Disputed
2 points

No one can ever completely get rid of debt because the government always has to play for certain things. He came closer than any other president to getting rid of the debt.

Side: Yes
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
2 points

even if it was for only a short amount of time at least he proved it could be done and he worked hard until it was done

Side: Yes
ariyonamcm(25) Disputed
1 point

He did a lot more than some presidents can say. A period of time you say, but that's longer than some. One cannot simply point out the bad he's done, without siding it with the good.

Side: Yes
0 points

The debt came back and is bigger than ever. His decisions that made the debt go away, later caused massive downfalls, which caused even more debt.

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
0 points

Getting rid of National Debt is close to impossible. Jackson lessened the debt a bit until the end up his presidency, and the debt came back in full force causing the nation to go into depression

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
1 point

If it was at the end of his presidency that the debt went up then how is that his fault? He did what he could for the time being and yes, the debt is almost impossible to get rid of which is why its amazing that he was able to get rid of it for the short amount of time that he had.

Side: Yes
2 points

Jackson should be on the $20 dollar bill, due to the dedication he put into the country. He did everything he could, to support the country, even if it meant some suffered, he made sure the majority did not.

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

He made so many suffer including the native americans. Looking at all that he did, he didn't care about who he was hurting.

Side: No
ariyonamcm(25) Disputed
2 points

How can you say the President was not thinking about everyone else, when he was trying to support the country? Many suffered, however Jackson worked hard to ensure that not Everyone suffered. Im not saying that his way of handling things were the best, and his views on indians were not justified, however he did support the country, and tried his best to do what was right. You make him sound like a dictator

Side: Yes
2 points

Andrew Jackson was a very strong man. He did everything he needed to and didn't worry about what people had to say about it. He knew that what he was doing was best for the country.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson should be on the $20 bill because he was a war hero who people can look up to and he even stopped national debt at one point in time. He was very relatable.

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

He was relatable before he went through with the indian removal act. Now that we know all that he did, he is no longer relatable unless you agree with killing lots of people and forcing them to walk through horrible weather. He was a great war hero because he was violent and ruthless and these were not good qualities as a president.

Side: No
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

No he was relatable because he did good things for our country and showed interest in the people . He put the Indians out because he felt it was good for our country. A part of being a good president is being able to make hard decisions.

Side: Yes
ariyonamcm(25) Disputed
1 point

Although the Indian Removal Act was not exactly ethical, you cannot say that Jackson knew that thousands would die. And it was wrong that he went against the courts to abide by his own wishes, however he only did what he thought was best for the country. The Indians being removed and placed into a different area, may have been what was best for the country at the time. The end results were indeed tragic, and I sympathize, but Jackson saw that it had to be done..so it had to be done.

Side: Yes
Brandlm(20) Disputed
1 point

He was a war hero yet he didnt care about slaves lives when he traded them to other people. He didnt care about the lives of indians when he forced them to move. I do not want to look up to a man who put civilian lives on the line just for the good of himself

Side: No
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

Good of himself? Or good of the country? We needed the land. Hard decisions had to be made. Also slaves, well no one viewed blacks as equal. This definitely wasn't right but that was the way they thought... everyone pretty much. So still he was representing the people.

Side: Yes
browncn(14) Disputed
1 point

It was for the good of his people not himself. He gave them more space to call home. Yes he took it from the Natives which I don't think is right but during that time most people hated Native Americans and saw them as inferior beings.

Side: Yes
trivettbb(21) Disputed
1 point

Yeah, how was this for the good of himself? He did it for the people.

Side: Yes
ariyonamcm(25) Disputed
1 point

Back then, black people were not viewed as people. This was the way things were before Jackson even came into office. As for the indians, the people saw them as un-trust worthy after the incident in which they supported and helped the British during the American Revolution. Im not saying this was all indians. merely a select few, but like most stereotypical and prejudice people in this country...they judge by what only SOME people did. Jackson, like most presidents, was abiding by the interests and trying to relate to his supporters as much as he could. Wrong? Sure! Unethical? Of course! But it is what a lot of presidents do today. We went over this in class...they relate to their supporters.

Side: Yes
1 point

He could relate to the average American man. That's why he was a good voice for the people during his presidency.

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
0 points

He only stopped the debt for a short period of time. The debt eventually came right back and sent us into depression

Side: No
madij33(22) Disputed
1 point

That isn't solely based on Andrew Jackson. Andrew supported and expanded the U.S government that may or may not have failed, it's based off of opinion. It wasn't JUST Andrew Jackson's fault we went into a depression. He did what was right for the country at the time.

Side: Yes
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
1 point

That's not his fault. He wasn't even President when that happened so he did what he could. He got rid of the debt and just because someone else screwed that up doesn't make him a bad president.

Side: Yes
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

He did the best that he could. It wasn't necessarily his fault.

Side: Yes
trivettbb(21) Disputed
1 point

The debt came back once he was out of office. So that was not his fault. He helped while he was in office.

Side: Yes
browncn(14) Disputed
1 point

But he did stop it which no other president has done. and now for the big 5-0

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

The debt wasn't all his fault he was doing he he believed was best for the country at the time. He never intended to put us in the situation.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson deserves to be on the $20 bill because he expanded our country to what it is today. During his presidency he doubled the size of the United States.

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
2 points

He was only able to double the size because he forced thousands of indians out of their land.

Side: No
trivettbb(21) Disputed
2 points

BUT we needed this land for farming. He kept the people alive, because of this decision.

Side: Yes
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

The only way he expanded the country is by scalping Native Americans and forcing them out of their homeland during the winter.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

When Jackson removed the Native Americans he relocated them into a new area. He had a place for them to live. He relocated them so that he can expand our country.

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

Yeah he did and he did it for the good sake of the place that you live in today.

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He expanded this country by killing indians and making thousands of indians move to different places.

Side: No
madij33(22) Disputed
1 point

He also moved them to their own land where someone can't come to take their land. He gave them a for sure home that no one could dispute.

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

The Louisiana Purchase was in 1803. This purchase doubled the size of the US. Jackson did not become president until 1828.

Side: No
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

Jackson didn't double the size of the US. The Louisiana Purchase did, which came before Jackson's time as president. He didn't even double to size of land we used that was owned. If you're going to commit acts of genocide to increase the size of actively used land, you might as well double the size of it, and not settle for a 1/4 increase

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

who ever said it was an act of genocide that's a strong word

Side: Yes
1 point

President Jackson should be on the 20 dollar bill because he was a man of the people and he was also a war hero

Side: Yes
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
2 points

He wasn't a man of the people if he didn't support everyone but himself and his supporters

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

One man can not appeal to the whole country Jackson supported the popular vote which was from the westerners and southerners.

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

His supporters accounted for the majority of the people that voted in the election of 1828, which was also the year with the largest number of voters in US history because of universal white male suffrage.

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He was a man of only the white people he didn't care for black people at all.

Side: No
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

When Jackson was president SOCIETY didn't see black people as people at all.

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

The term "man of the people" can go multiple ways. The term back then meant only the people with white skin. What about the Indians he walked to death and allowed to starve, and die of the cold, especially the small children and elderly, who were not strong enough to endure the thousands of miles of walking.

Side: No
browncn(14) Disputed
1 point

Everything in it's own time. In the 1800's it was not the time of unity. It was not the time for white, tan, black, or green to be seen as equal. Do it think it was right, no but that is because I was raised to by parents who taught me to see people for qualities and not colors, but if I'd been raised to see those with skin different from my own as inferior to the white race, then maybe I'd agree with what Jackson did. You have to look at the time he was in and his actions then not compare them to now. A lot has happened in the last 200 years.

Side: Yes
1 point

He should be on the $20 bill because he is a self-made man and a war hero.

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
2 points

He was a war hero haha it was only one battle that he won against the british which was after the war which basically did not contribute to the war of 1812.

Side: No
1 point

he secured Florida from Spain and did all this without starting a war.

Side: Yes
1 point

Andrew Jackson deserved to be on the twenty dollar bill. He did everything he could to help the country stay together and be as strong as possible.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

He helped the country by vetoing the rechartering of the Second National Bank?

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
1 point

That is what he did for the people. The PEOPLE of America didn't like the national banks and he stood for them. That's what a good president should do. He should stand up for his people.

Side: Yes
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

Yes, the Americans didn't like the idea of the national bank so that's why Jackson vetoed it, to make the Americans happy.

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

Everything he did during his presidency was to satisfy him, or the people who supported him. He caused a depression and businesses to lose money by ending the National Bank.

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
2 points

You say that like it's a bad thing. It's a good thing he satisfied his people. He also brought the nation OUT of depression.

Side: Yes
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
1 point

Once again Jackson did what the people wanted. The president was voted in by the people to stand for what the people want in their government. I don't see how doing what the people of America wanted him to do makes him a bad president. The people of America didn't agree with the bank so he vetoed it. He stood for the people.

Side: Yes
Harley(17) Disputed
1 point

He just ignored the other branches in government ideas and did whatever he wanted, he was called a man of the people but he did what he wanted and didn't listen to the people.

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
2 points

He was called a man of the people because of what he did for the people. First he came from the south which made him relatable to the people. Secondly, when they need the lands he got the Indians out so he could give the people the land they needed to grow food and live. Finally, when the people wanted to get rid of the national bank so he did that. He did all those things for the people.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson was a war hero he helped us win at New Orleans this is why he should be on the $20 bill

Side: Yes
Harley(17) Disputed
2 points

just because he helped us win a war doesn't mean he should be on the $20 bill, he didn't do anything else to help other people while his presidency he only did things to help him

Side: No
trivettbb(21) Disputed
2 points

He did so do things to help the people! He got rid of national debt, he got more land for farmers & he vetoed the 2nd national bank for the people.

Side: Yes
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

how he paid off the national debt which no other president has done

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

A war hero he won one battle against the british and a war hero doesn't tell his solider's to scalp the enemies.

Side: No
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

there have been plenty of people that have won important battles

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
2 points

Yes that is completely true. Lots of people have won lots of important battles Like George Washington for instance. Everyone loved him and thought he would make a great president because he was a war hero. Everything Washington did wasn't agreeable either yet he is still on the one dollar bill. You say that Jackson shouldn't be on the 20 because a lot of people have been war hero's so I guess Washington shouldn't be on the 1 because lots of people are war hero's and presidents so it shouldn't make a difference. The fact still remains that Jackson was a war hero and that is something that should be honored. Other war hero's are honored in different ways. Being put on the twenty was Jackson way of being honored. Just because there have been plenty of war hero's like Jackson and Washington doesn't mean we shouldn't honor them.

Side: Yes
smithtt(20) Disputed
1 point

Yes this is true but them other battles wasn't as important as the battle of New Orleans.

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
1 point

The only reason people called him a war hero was because he defeated the British ONE time in a battle that shouldn't have even happened.

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
2 points

The Battle of New Orleans was what Jackson was best known for and probably what made people see him as a war hero but he was in other battles and won other battles too like the Battle of Horsebend. Even so I didn't realize that there was a new definition to what a war hero is because last time I check it was, and i quote "a person who is admired for their bravery in war." It didn't say how many battles they fought or won but the bravery they showed in those battles.

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

Not many people have defeated the British, at that time they had the strongest.

Side: Yes
1 point

Andrew Jackson's actions and authority over the nullification crisis proves he deserves to be on the $20 bill. What he did was the best thing for the United States by far. Andrew Jackson put a stop to the unconstitutional ways.

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He over exaggerated by doing this because it was just a little group of people who started the SC militia and he sent his whole naval force which was a little too much.

Side: No
1 point

I believe Jackson deserves to be on the twenty dollar bill because regardless if he had gray areas in his morality, everybody does. It's like Hannah Montana said, everybody makes mistakes, even if they're our president.

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

It is ok to make mistakes, but to defy the Supreme Court on a very serious case isn't a mistake. He knew what he was doing.

Side: No
madij33(22) Disputed
2 points

He did know what he was doing, and he thought he was doing the right thing. Moving the Indians was a good thing for America because it gave them the land they needed to keep growing and providing for the citizens. Moving the Indians could also support the Indians too, because it gave the Indians land that no one could come and take. It gave the Indians and security and an opportunity to grow also.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson should be on the $20 bill because he wanted to always keep his people happy.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

If he wanted to keep the people happy, why did he put a tariff in place to raise the prices of manufactured goods in the south (tariffs of abomination)

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

He just wanted to help the economy and make things better.

Side: Yes
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

the tariffs helped get the nation out of debt. he didnt do it to upset anyone he was just doing what he knew best for his country

Side: Yes
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

He also promised to lower the tax every year to the original tax

Side: Yes
MrOKeefe(27) Disputed
1 point

"his people" which ones? The slaves he forced to work? The Natives he walked to death? The South Carolinians he threatened? The people who suffered from the depression caused by his bank war?

Side: No
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He wanted to keep the white people happy, he didn't care for the slaves he had.

Side: No
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

I don't think he strived to keep the happiness of white people alive and not care for the slaves he had. I would hope that he would be more worried about how our country is doing at the time.

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

He may have wanted to make his people happy, but his actions did not always show that.

Side: No
Brandlm(20) Disputed
1 point

Yes, keep his people happy by ruining the economy, sending native americans away for his own good? not really. I mean he kept his supporters happy, thats all he did. he didnt care about the others.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson should be on the 20$ bill because he served our country and was a good solider

Side: Yes
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

He don't deserve to be on it because he was a very bad person.

Side: No
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

he was, he did more good things then he did bad he made pet bank

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

Just because he served our country during the War of 1812 does not mean he is fit to be on the $20 Bill. Had he not become president, he would never have made it on the bill. This shows that he had "earned the right" to be on the bill from his presidency. His actions during the presidency proved to be treasonous, racist, and untrustworthy. Especially after he defied the constitution and refused to obey the ruling of the Supreme Court

Side: No
1 point

I agree with Alan, by ignoring his basic duties as a president, he is untrustworthy. He did whatever he wanted and we allowed him to. We realize all the bad he did now, and i think he should be removed from the $20 bill. Everyday war heroes don't get their faces but on currency. Therefore, that isn't a good argument.

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

I can think of more bad things and qualities about him than good. He was a good soldier because he was violent which didn't make for a good president. He had a terrible mindset and he was very controlling. He abused his power.

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

what made him violent? yes he has some bad qualities, but doenst everyone? he did many good thing too. for the most part people like him. he was a man of the people

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson understood the struggle of being poor he worked his was up like most Americans do

Side: Yes
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

Okay yes he WAS like most Americans but then once he became "popular" he changed for the worst.

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

yes he may of upset groups of people but you cant please everyone and for the most part people like jackson

Side: Yes
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

He didn't change for the worst he expanded the spoils system which gave people more jobs.

Side: Yes
1 point

he also strengthened power of presidency and expanded the spoils system.

Side: Yes
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

Expanding the spoil system might have gotten more people into jobs, but they were only for he's supporters and not for the whole country. He only rewarded people who agree with his ways.

Side: No
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

The spoils system was not a good thing .. It just made it so that you and your friends were in power not who deserved to be in power.

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

all presidents figure out a way to get supporters, the spoil system was his way to get supporters. he had to get them somehow. he just gave them an incentive

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He did that only to give his supporters good jobs which was not good for the people who didn't support him which was not fair at all.

Side: No
1 point

Andrew Jackson was a very good president. He did what he saw was necessary to keep the country safe and economically sound. He acted on the rebellion that came up when they started the tariffs. No one else would have had enough courage to send ships to Charleston. Also him moving the Indians opened up more space for the Americans to expand.

Side: Yes
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
1 point

Moving the Indians from their ancestral land was wrong just so we could have more space to expand on. And if he was going to move the Indians he could've done it a more friendly way but instead he had a violent approach and that doesn't show him as a good president

Side: No
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

The Native American's would have moved from their ancestral land anyways. Cultures don't stay in the same land forever, they have to travel to expand.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson deserves to be on the $20 bill as he won the popular vote and he was a war hero

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
1 point

just because he was a war hero does not mean he should be on the $20 bill many war hero are not on money why are they not on money

Side: No
petersag(22) Disputed
1 point

Jackson was many other things other than a war hero. He was a great president. He was a strong leader and a true American man.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

The two reasons that you have provided do not give enough of an argument that Jackson should be on U.S. currency.

Side: No
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

There are many war heros but he made it onto the $20 bill because people thought he did many great things. Being a war hero meant that he had qualities that he could put to good use in a war. During his presidency he seemed to handle things violently as well and this was irrational. Not everyone agreed with how he handled situations.

Side: No
1 point

He successfully paid off the entire national debt created by previous wars, particularly the war of 1812.

Side: Yes
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

He might have did that but then he turned around and ruined the American economy.

Side: No
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

No he didn't if anything he created a larger debt by starting wars with Native Americans which was for no reason accept to get more land.

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

no he paid off those too and more land for America would be better for us because we could use it for agriculture

Side: Yes
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

And by getting more land he would get the Nation out of debt by increasing the economy. If the United States could produce more crops then they could sell to other nations.

Side: Yes
1 point

That was a very hard things to do. To pay off a national debt that we built up during the war of 1812 took a lot of leadership.

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

But what about the money he had to use to march thousands of Natives in which many did not survive, especially the young children and elderly?

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

That did cost more but much more could be made as a result through farming and agriculture

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson tried to do what he thought was best so even if what he did failed at least he tried to make our country better. things cant get better before they get worse

Side: Yes
1 point

He threatened to declare war with SC because we really wanted to keep SC in our union we couldn't afford to lose them

Side: Yes
1 point

He was right for our country clearly considering he set a record of votes given to any one president. The people wanted him and the people got him.

Side: Yes
1 point

he also should be because he defeated the British in the Battle of New Orleans.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

There have been lots of people that have won battles against other nations, i don't see their faces on money...how does the winning of one battle instantly give him the honor of having his face on money?

Side: No
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

That was the only battle he won against the british and it was also after the war which basically meant it was for nothing.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

But by winning the battle it showed that Jackson would be a great leader.

Side: Yes
1 point

Yes! Andrew Jackson is worth $20. He got rid of national debt, right? That was something big for the country and no other president could get rid of it.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson deserved to be on the $20 bill because he managed to help us get Florida from Spain

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson was also seen by many as a "man of the people" and the people could relate to him because he worked for what he had

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
1 point

latter in his time in office he became a person of the north and put hight tariffs on the south.

Side: No
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

Said tariff had a compromise thought up by henry clay were both sides were somewhat happy. The point of a compromise is that neither side is happy at the end of a compromise because both sides lose something so that it is more equal.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson is the one that showed the government he could wield power over a single state

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson also got the US more land as he bought Florida from Spain

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
1 point

yes it is a good idea to buy land when we had financial problems in our countries

Side: No
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

Think of it more like a investment, he invested the money to buy the land then he can have more people and grow more crops to support more americans

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

His way of getting land for the US is either buying which is the nice way or just killing Native Americans and forcing them to move is the other way.

Side: No
1 point

We wanted him in the first place he got the most electoral votes at the election the house of representatives just didn't want to acknowledge that

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson was known for "man of the people" because of what he did for the union

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He was known as man of the white people not the man of the black people.

Side: No
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

So, a "man of the people" goes against the Supreme Court and forces out thousands of Native Americans.

Side: No
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

He was a man of our citizens and by him forcing Native Americans out of there homes, it created more room for our citizens, which does make him a man of the people.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson proved that the national government could and should have more power over the state government

Side: Yes
1 point

should be on there also because many people related to him.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson vetoed the charter’s renewal also made pet bank

Side: Yes
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

Pet banks were very bad for the economy. Pet bank gave too many loans. Too many loans make their money worthless.

Side: No
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

That's why Jackson came up with a new way to buy land. Since money was becoming more and more worthless he decided to institute the use of gold.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson helped take away some of the national debt that the past presidents and citizens of the United states helped to create

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson was a president that actually worked for what he did.

Side: Yes
1 point

He should be on the $20 bill because when he passed the tariffs and the whole thing with the Nullification Crisis, SC didn't like the tariffs, but the only reason Jackson went to SC with the navy was to have them go for the tariff and not against it. He just wanted what he thought was best for the people.

Side: Yes
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

So threatening people because they don't agree with you and your "rule" or whatever is a good thing?

Side: No
1 point

Jackson spoke for what the people wanted as he vetoed the renewal of the national bank

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

Jackson created the pet banks. He vetoed the rechartering of the NATIONAL BANK.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

When Clay pushed the bill to recharter the National Bank he was hoping that it would be a downfall to Jackson. If Jackson passed the bill he would lose western voters but if he vetoed the bill he would lose wealthier Eastern voters.

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
1 point

he vetoed the national bank not the pet bank. The pet banks made money to give to the poor which in return we had to then make gold and silver our money for some time to buy land and stuff.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

He didnt want the national bank to be in charge because he was to help the poor and instead of the rich.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

He only did what SOME of the people wanted so that he could increase his reputation

Side: No
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

You cannot please everyone. No matter how hard one may try to make everyone happy someone is not going to get their way. And especially when you are president. And a wise quote states "it is the greatest good to the greatest number of people which is the measure of right and wrong." Meaning if you can't Please everyone do the best for the most people

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

He did what the MAJORITY of the people NEEDED to help them thrive.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson made pet banks which helped people who were in desperate need of money get it to provide for their family

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson was a very relatable man. If you can relate to a person you seem to like them better. A relatable president makes everyone feel better. Like he's just "your average person".

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson was a war hero and put his life on the line in the name of his country, this also was one of the ways the people related to him

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
1 point

like i said last time a lot of people put there life on line for our country and they are not on money

like

Alvin York

Frank Luke

Henry Johnson

that is 3 of the six i found

they are not on money

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
2 points

well obviously he did better than them because out of all of them HIS face is on our 20 dollar bill.

Side: Yes
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

Jackson was liked by many and he worked to get where he was, I'm not saying just because he was a war hero is the only way someone should be on american currency. What I am trying to clarify is that he had a bigger reputation then the people listed above.

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He actually was the one to sit back and relax while all his men did the work, the pictures showed him as if he was the first person to throw the punch which was not right.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

But you don't know who was the first one to start the picture could be draw to one persons perspective.

Side: Yes
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

The chain of command you are referring to sounds like someone who orders men tells them what to do. I.E someone who has tactical value

Side: Yes
1 point

He was all for America he risked his life on the front lines of war and he never gave up he made sure we would win our freedom

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

We have already won our freedom during the Revolutionary War

Side: No
1 point

He also honestly worked his way into presidency through hard work and bravery in war

Side: Yes
1 point

He was honest and a very respectable man among many people and only wanted what was best for America

Side: Yes
Harley(17) Disputed
2 points

he said the bank was unconstitutional even though the supreme said that it was constitutional, he wouldn't recharter it because he hated it and it made him lose money

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

yeah but it was beneficial and almost really necessary to the function of the government

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

Jackson hated it because the people hated it, the bank for the most part was seen as an advantage to the rich.

Side: Yes
1 point

The land that was open now that the native Americans moved was used for growing food that the Americans needed for the expanding population. Jackson saw that we needed more land.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson was an honest man that gave his all to do the best he could during his presidency

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
1 point

Ronald Reagan did his best during his presidency why is he not on a bill

Side: No
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

irrelevant this debate is about Jackson, and during the 1800's Reagan wasn't even born yet

Side: Yes
1 point

I agree with Noah. So many people have done great things for our country, why are they not on the $20 bill?

Side: No
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

Obviously Jackson did a better job which is the reason why he is on the 20 dollar bill

Side: Yes
1 point

jackson was a good man and tried to keep the country together and didn't want SC to leave the union

Side: Yes
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

If he was a good man then he would have not owned slaves and whipped them.

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

having slaves was how he was raised, he didnt know any better. just like you were raised not to have slave you couldnt imagine owning slaves, he couldnt imagine not owning them

Side: Yes
smithtt(20) Disputed
1 point

Nobody said he whipped them, maybe he had somebody do his dirty work.

Side: Yes
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

every body had slaves back then even jefferson and washington and they had their faces on the 1$ and 5$ bills too

Side: Yes
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

No one stated any abuse to his slaves and due to his upbringing he grew up thinking having slaves were simply a way of life

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

If Jackson did not want SC to leave the union he should have used less violent methods. A compromise could have been made sooner and there would have been less conflict. Jackson also could have kept everyone in mind in the first place.

Side: No
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

When Jackson threatened South Carolina the way that he did, he did it because of how much stuff was currently going on and all the problems that had been caused due to South Carolina wanting to leave the Union.

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

He didn't hurt or use violence towards anyone, he showed people the consequences of succession, it was more like a warning.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

If he was a good man...why did he go against the ruling of the court during the Indian Removal Act?

Side: No
1 point

All it is is money so what does it matter whos face is on it? We spend money everyday and i'm pretty sure no one of ever sits there and thinks "oh this guy killed someone i'm never going to use a 20 again" I also have the feeling quite a lot of people didn't even know who was on the bill until this assignment was given

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

Although we do spend money every day, not everyone's face can end up on a dollar bill used by millions of people. Every. Single. Day. He is undeserving of such an honor as he contributed to the mass genocide of innocent natives who were given the right to stay on their land by the Supreme Court, disobeying that ruling anyway and doing what he wanted.

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

Again it wasn't genocide he just relocated them he didn't kill all of them

Side: Yes
1 point

He deserves to be on the $20 bill because he fought for his country to better it with brute force and political force.

Side: Yes
1 point

All presidents have flaws, every last one of them, and many presidents have a rough time as president, but Jackson did amazing things for our country that greatly outweigh his faults.

Side: Yes
1 point

Andrew Jackson is the first and only president to actually get rid of the national debt.

Side: Yes
1 point

Andrew Jackson also saved the nation without starting a war.

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

You mean Jackson was willing to completely decimate South Carolina and its people over a simple tariff?

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

the tariff was meant to benefit the entire country and promote manufacturing it wasn't a "little tariff"

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

It was not a "simple tariff". It was a complicated implication to help the economy.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

How did Jackson "save" the nation without starting a war????????????????

Side: No
1 point

Jackson got rid of the national debt no other president did that

Side: Yes
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

How did Jackson get rid of the national debt?????????????????????????????

Side: No
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

He increased the tariffs and pay off the government's debt

Side: Yes
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

he actually did pay off the entire national debt from previous wars which has never been done by anyyyyyyyy other president

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson put a stop to a state threatening to leave the Union, which would have caused our country to start to fall apart. Even though the way he stopped them seemed brutal and unnecessary, he made the right call.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

Henry Clay is the one that stopped a state from leaving the Union, he's the one that came up with the compromise...

Side: No
1 point

Andrew Jackson deserves to be on the twenty dollar bill because he was a war hero who helped our country greatly. He was able to make even the hardest decisions. He was not afraid to do what was best for the people even if that meant being very stern.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson Showed that the Federal Government could wield power over a single state.

Side: Yes
1 point

To be honest he really didnt kill the Cherokee indians with his hands the elements from the long travel did

Side: Yes
1 point

When One becomes president of the united States...unfortunately mistakes will be made. After-all, you are taking a countries problems, its needs, its wants, etc, into your hands. There are some things that Jackson Could have done better, but in my opinion, its not what he did necessarily...but how he did it. All the things he's done that everyone has mentioned on the opposing side may sound wrong, however its how it was handled that was wrong. Jackson did what HE thought was best for the Country. I think i've made my point on that argument.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson not only made decisions at the needed time like most presidents wouldn't have, he kept it intact and together and made it stronger and bigger when he was in office.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson led the the army for the last battle of the War of 1812 to defeat the British and bring to the Nation the Nation the Era of Good Feeling. Nothing better could have been given to the country after a time of war and battles going on.

Side: Yes
1 point

Andrew Jackson was a great leader to be in the position that he was for this country and the way that he did things were the best possible way that he could do it considering the outcome.

Side: Yes
0 points

Jackson was a man of the people. He did the best he could for his people and unfortunately a depression was a result. He fought figuratively and literally for his country and that deserves recognition.

Side: Yes
0 points

Jackson was also known as a war hero and a hard worker and an overall man of honor

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
2 points

There have been many war heroes and hard workers...what makes him so special that his face is on the $20 bill???

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

Without Jackson the United States wouldn't be anything like it is today. During his presidency he doubled the size of the US.

Side: Yes
1 point

he did way more than just being a war hero and hard worker.

Side: No
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

He's was a a great president and deserved it for the things he went through and how much he did.

Side: Yes
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
0 points

People could relate to him and they felt he represented them correctly.

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
1 point

Just because he was a hard worker doesn't mean he should be on the $20 bill.

Side: No
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

He was a hard worker who helped our country and did a lot of great things, so he does deserve to be on the bill.

Side: Yes
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

he was not just a hard worker. he worked hard for the good of our country. he risked his life in war, he preserved the union, he got our nation out of debt for a little while. he did many great things

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

Hard work can accomplish anything, and that's something that Andrew Jackson represented.

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

He wasn't just a hard worker he did so much more than that.

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He was selfish and cared for no one but him self and he hated Native Americans in which he showed this by forcing thousands of them to move.

Side: No
Jarred(16) Disputed
1 point

If Jackson was selfish and only cared for himself is this why he was a war hero and fought for the country and laid his life on the line?

Side: Yes
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

Even if he was a war hero and a hard-worker, he still doesn't deserve to be on the bill.

Side: No
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

yes he does if he wasn't a hard worker he would not have made it to presidency

Side: Yes
smithtt(20) Disputed
1 point

So what person does belong on the $20 bill because i definitely can't think of a better choice.

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

Those are two great reason why he should be on the 20 dollar bill he's done that he more.

Side: Yes
4 points

Jackson does not belong on the $20 bill because he was all of America's bad qualities wrapped up into a human being. He was power-hungry, controlling, stubborn, and violent. His methods of handling the nullification crisis were controlling and violent.

Side: No
MrOKeefe(27) Disputed
3 points

Maybe. But, he also embodied what makes America great. He successfully defended our borders by defeating the British and he represented the people who elected him (to a fault, arguably). He made America feel strong and had a back bone, which is a quality many Americans wish our current politicians possessed.

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
2 points

he may have defended our borders but not only him but his men defended our borders by defeating the british he is not hercules he did not defend it by himself why is his men not on money

Side: No
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
2 points

He was also a hero, he tried what he thought was best and he didn't quit when the situation got worse

Side: Yes
1 point

yes, he worked hard for out country and he did many great things. just like other people have said, he isn't the only president thats messed up a few times, they all have.

Side: Yes
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
2 points

Maybe it was violent, but he had to do what he had to do to make the people follow the tariff. He felt like it was good for his people.

Side: Yes
1 point

I supported this because they tell some really good logic to this I mean he was like a pig rude, stubborn, violent, hungry for money.

Side: No
Amarel(5669) Clarified
1 point

Welcome to the site!

Just so you know, some debates are pretty old and tend to get ignored by current users. If you wish to get feedback and pushback, try checking new or active debates under the Browse tab. If an old debate really interests you, you can always recreate it anew.

Side: Yes
2 points

Jackson's face should not be on the 20 dollar bill because people said he was man of the people but really meaning the white people which was really cruel.

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
2 points

He was a man of the people. It doesn't say man of the "white" people. So how do you know he was against blacks?

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
2 points

It had many laws were black people couldn't vote or do much so really it was for the whites not the slaves.

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

back then black people were not treated well by anyone. it wasnt just him

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
2 points

But he could of did something to change that which was a bad act on his part.

Side: No
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
1 point

He did what was best for the majority not the minority because its better to protect 10 people than to only protect 1

Side: Yes
2 points

He shouldn't be on the $20 dollar bill because he did not respect the decision made by the Court to allow the Native Americans to stay on their ancestral property

Side: No
smithtt(20) Disputed
1 point

i understand that he shouldn't have disobeyed the court decisions, but Jackson had to expand the nation for agriculture purposes.

Side: Yes
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

If Jackson did not expand our land then the agricultural economy would have fallen because people were running out of room.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
2 points

Since the Louisiana Purchase there has been plenty of room to move and expand in the agricultural economy...Jackson just disliked the Native Americans.

Side: No
heyme(18) Disputed
1 point

There was a lot more land out there. He took the Indians' land when he could've just let them stay in their home in peace. He didn't have to make them move just because they were an inconvenience to him.

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

He did this because he thought it was best for the people and for the nations. We gained more land and more farming area for this.

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

That makes him sound brave. That situation ended up helping the Americans.

Side: Yes
2 points

when south carolina made the ordinance of nullification jackson threatened them, and sent navy ships over and told them to shoot if it was necessary

Side: No
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

To prevent them from leaving the union and to preserve the US in it's entirety.

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

it was more of a warning, not just for sc but to any state that went against the country as a whole.

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

That was the best way to do things considering the threats that South Carolina had of leaving the Union. They also threatened to nullify the laws that had been set for every individual state to follow.

Side: Yes
2 points

most of the things he did when he was president didn't benefit the US much but mostly hurt it

Side: No
1 point

Jackson doesn't deserve to be on the 20 dollar bill, his presidency just made everything worst for the economy and government.

Side: No
2 points

but jackson strengthen the presidency and did what he could to help the US

Side: No
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

It caused chaos in between the States. I know that it might had been good at some point, but it caused many effects that didn't need to happen if he would just compromise.

Side: No
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

But he stopped national debt at one point. So how would that be worst for the economy?

Side: Yes
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

National debt might have been stopped, but it hurt the Southern part of the country terribly and it was unfair to many agricultural farmers and others in the south.

Side: No
1 point

That could do nothing but help the economy. Now that we didn't have a national debt we felt more open to do things.

Side: Yes
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
1 point

He didn't made things worse for the economy. He got rid of the national debt which made things better for the economy not worse. He made a stronger federal government which a lot of people didn't see as a bad thing.

Side: Yes
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

Okay I know that National Debt was a big thing, but all the taxes that were an affect of the operation hurt many farmers and not many Southerners benefited like the Northerners more and I know that it help, but what about the affect of sectionalism between the states?

Side: No
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

By not rechartering the National Bank and making pet banks, he made the economy better? The pet banks didn't have enough money to give to the businesses in order to support themselves. Also, his pet banks caused the value of money to depreciate.

Side: No
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
1 point

*worse and not true he gave people more jobs and he expanded our territory to help our American citizens

Side: Yes
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

But it's not all about us, the American citizens, what about the indian's? What about the Cherokees that had to move from their homeland for Jackson's selfish need for gold?

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

How did he make things worse? He did good things too. He was a helper.

Side: Yes
1 point

Yea , he did things to better the economy. He tried to help his country.

Side: Yes
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

but he ended the national debt at one point. he did help the economy

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

Jackson held a steady position with our country during his presidency. Even though situations broke out and things went wrong, he helped a lot to maintain the well being of our country.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

But, he created a depression...and just left it for the next president to handle

Side: No
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

he paid the national debt, kept the union together if it wasn't for him the US would had fell apart

Side: Yes
1 point

he should not be on the $20 bill do to the fact that he supported the indian removal act.

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
2 points

So? He was trying to keep his people safe and out of danger!

Side: Yes
browntm1(10) Disputed
1 point

Trying to keep people safe and out of danger? He killed people when he put the indian removal act in place. Many people died and even if they didn't die they suffered and lost their homes.

Side: No
MrOKeefe(27) Clarified
1 point

When we think about historical figures, we should consider the society they lived in and were raised in. Saying people were "bad" because they owned slaves or wanted to remove Native Americans in the 1800s is like calling a person in India "stupid" because they don't speak English. People's knowledge and beliefs are a result of their upbringings and the society they live in. Right and wrong aren't always clear cut, especially in a historical lens.

Side: Yes
1 point

He voted with the popular vote. He wanted to make 100 people happy rather than just 10. He did what most the people wanted.

Side: Yes
nealnm(20) Disputed
0 points

he was keeping people safe by kill other people of which some we had treaties with.

Side: No
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
1 point

He was trying to give the American citizens more opportunity to spread out and make our country better

Side: Yes
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

What about sectionalism? It hurt us, because the more we grew in territory the more sectionalism there was. The equaling amount of slave states and free states had to be watched. Plus when a new state came they had to decide, but they also had to get another state to be the other, which made it harder for the states to compromise when it came to the slavery issue. Extending our territory made it harder for the natives as well, an example would be the trail of tears where many cherokees died moving away from their homeland.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson does not deserve to be on the $20 bill because he wasn't what the people needed. He didn't represent their thinking, which is what he should've be doing as president. Instead, he just did whatever he wanted to do.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

If Jackson did not represent their thinking then why did he have so many supporters in the first place?

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
1 point

People thought that he was going to be their voice in the government (like a president should), but when people saw what he was doing and the decisions he was making, he made it clear that they had different views.

Side: No
madij33(22) Disputed
1 point

If Jackson didn't represent the people and take into account their opinions, then why was he considered the "man of the people"?

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

He was a "man of the people" to white people. Not Natives who were forced from their homes and land that was passed down from generation to generation, and made them walk miles upon miles in the winter through the snow. There's a reason people remember him for genocide.

Side: No
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

He was also later re-elected, that doesn't sound like someone that people dislike.

Side: Yes
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

he did what he thought was best for the people. he preserved the union which was good for the U.S., and he got land for the farmers. its not like people didnt like him, he was called the man of the people

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
1 point

Yes but the land he got was taken from the Indians. He ignored the Supreme Court's ruling and forced them out so he could have the land.

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

He didn't do whatever he wanted to do. He actually did what made his supporters happy.

Side: Yes
petersag(22) Disputed
1 point

He actually did represent the people very well. He was so alike the usual man back then. He was a president for the people and helped them in every way that he could.

Side: Yes
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
1 point

He didnt represent their thinking? He was the one who won the election with the most electoral votes that the AMERICAN CITIZENS put in

Side: Yes
heyme(18) Disputed
1 point

He bribed people with the spoil system. You can't say that everyone that voted for him agreed with him. They could've just been voting for him for a job. No one knows their motives.

Side: No
1 point

most people related to him and we himself was a soldier so he fought for our country.

Side: No
1 point

America, standing for a country of equality, is covering the horrendous actions of a man who represented our whole country. This said man named Andrew Jackson denied the inalienable rights of other humans just because the color of their skin was different from his and other white men. He also abused the power he had from being able to represent the country to unconstitutionally force Native Americans out of their land that was ruled that they had the right to live there. This is why Jackson does NOT deserve to be on the American $20 Bill.

Side: No
petersag(22) Disputed
1 point

He was just doing so to try and help America. The expanding country needed more space and room for growth. He gave them a place to go.

Side: Yes
rojasi(16) Disputed
1 point

Andrew Jackson was elected by people, people gave him power. The power is used for the people. Andrew Jackson did not do this to people , people did it to the Native Americans and others.

Side: Yes
burnettedf(20) Disputed
0 points

but that opened up land for the Americans so therefore it was beneficial to America so its justifiable

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

It should not be justifiable to force Natives out of their land that WE invaded, and stole from them. We also forced out Natives that would be willing to become American citizens to keep their land as traditional historical grounds

Side: No
1 point

He caused the US to go into a depression because he was self-fish.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

How is Jackson self-fish if he was the one who expanded the United States so that the people could have more agricultural land.

Side: Yes
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
2 points

he "expanded" the land by killing, and forcing the Native Americans from their ancestral property...to me, it doesn't sound like his face should be on money

Side: No
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

he "expanded" the land by killing, and forcing the Native Americans from their ancestral property...to me, it doesn't sound like his face should be on money

Side: No
ariyonamcm(25) Disputed
1 point

He may have led this country into a depression, but he bounced back from that mistake by doing us one better...ridding us of national debt.

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

We didn't go into debt because he was selfish, he was looking at the big picture.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson shouldn't be on the $20 bill because he forced innocent native americans move from their home and walk thousands of miles to a new place. He also didn't listen to anyone but himself, so he was very selfish.

Side: No
1 point

he did what he thought was right for the country so why not do what he did?

Side: No
cantaffazt(11) Disputed
1 point

because what he did harmed the people in the long run and also he forced native americans from their land

Side: Yes
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
1 point

Actually he didn't listen to congress i'm pretty sure a lot of americans at the time wanted the Cherokee out because they need the space so they could spread out and make a better life for our citizens

Side: Yes
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

He didn't mean to harm them. He wanted to send them to a different place. He didn't think so many would be harmed.

Side: Yes
1 point

He also gave them a secure and definite area to stay where they would not be further disturbed.

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

He wasn't selfish to the people he was doing what he was doing it for. He made room for the country to expand and become bigger and evolve into what it has become today.

Side: Yes
1 point

He was a slave trader, He made indians move for the good of himself. He only cared when people weren't going to be on his side. He wanted votes and the love of the people. Yet he sent indians away, and held african americans as slaves to wait on his hand and foot.

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
2 points

back then, everyone was a slave trader and had their slaves work for them. he found a new home for the indians so his people would have land to farm on.

Side: Yes
trivettbb(21) Disputed
1 point

America needed this land he took from the Indians to farm. He helped keep people alive because of this. More land equals more food which means less hungry people. HE DID THIS FOR HIS COUNTRY.

Side: Yes
Brandlm(20) Disputed
1 point

Okay yea it was for the good of the country, but he forced the indians out. they had to pick up and leave everything behind, they lost many lives on the Trail of tears. Whats good for the country when your basically forcing men, women, and children to their death. The indians had no idea what was out there, it was a death mission.

Side: No
1 point

ANOTHER REASON IS BECAUSE HE ADOPTED THE SPOILS SYSTEM. THIS SYSTEM WAS VERY HARMFUL PRECEDENT TO THE FUTURE PRESIDENTS.

Side: No
1 point

ANOTHER REASON IS BECAUSE HE ADOPTED THE SPOILS SYSTEM. THIS SYSTEM WAS VERY HARMFUL PRECEDENT TO THE FUTURE PRESIDENTS.

Side: No
petersag(22) Disputed
1 point

The spoil system made people work harder. It made them see what they wanted and how they could get there if they just worked harder and better.

Side: Yes
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

The spoil system was bad for future presidents. This system was a form of corruption.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson made up the spoil system, which gave his supporters high ranking jobs. He was basically bribing people to vote for him and they'd get government jobs.

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

Yeah, it helped the people learn to work harder for their money. This isn't a bad thing. He was actually helping the people.

Side: Yes
1 point

The nullification crisis was during the period of Jacksons presidency. He created the tariff for the good of one region instead of both. He generally only cares for those more fortunate.

Side: No
1 point

He threatened South Carolina with the US Army when they were exercising their states' rights.

Side: No
1 point

He was thinking for the good of himself and those more fortunate. Not for everyone in every social standings.

Side: No
1 point

he unnecessarily used 12 vetoes while he was president to stop bills, that didn't need to be stopped

Side: No
1 point

while the bank war was happening he took advantage of his presidential powers and stopped any money funding a second national bank just because he didn't want another bank

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
2 points

That makes him sound selfish. He didn't veto that for himself, he vetoed it because his supporters didn't like the idea of a second national bank.

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson clearly went against the ruling of the Supreme Court and did what he wanted. It wasn't a dire need to have the exact land that the Indians were on and had been on for a while. He could've simply got more land from another part of the continent.

Side: No
1 point

He knew that creating the tariffs would help gain northern votes. There were more people in the north than in the south, elections were chosen by popular vote in most states, meaning there were more people to vote for Jackson. With slaves he traded them for money and other goods for himself. Maybe if he had shared the money with the people that would've been a tad bit better. but did he? no. He used the money to push out indians

Side: No
1 point

People were saying that he didn't mean to harm the Indians. If that was true, he wouldn't have forced them to walk hundreds of miles in the winter.

Side: No
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

he did that so americans would have more land to live and farm on

Side: Yes
1 point

Because to the indians and those who sided with the indians, they did nothing wrong. Jackson moved them for the good of his supporters and to make room for more Americans. so it wasn't just the indians that were affected.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson briefly stopped the debt. Yet the debt eventually came right back and sent us into depression

Side: No
1 point

Jackson ignored the decisions of the supreme court and what the majority wanted. As a president you are suppose to appeal to the majority and do right by your country. Jackson was not doing so when he went ahead a went through with the indian removal act after it was decided that the Indians could stay.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson didn't double the size of the US. The Louisiana Purchase did and that was before Jackson became the President.

Side: No
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

nobody said he doubled the size he just removed the natives so americans could have more land to fram

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson destroyed the Bank of the U.S. The bank had caused problems for him personally before he became president. He took advantage of his power and got rid of it, no matter who it was benefitting.

Side: No
1 point

If jackson was a 'man of the people' then why did he only listen to white men and let them vote? He should've let the african americans, indians and even women atleast have a heard opinion. He only listened to the white male land owners and those who he knew would support in his running.

Side: No
1 point

He was a bad president. Just face it. He did many bad things to our country.

Side: No
1 point

Andrew Jackson created and put in place The Spoils system. This stated that the people who supported him would get great jobs close to him. This was similar to the “corrupt bargin” that he and his supporters accused John Quincy Adams of! The Spoils System makes him seem like a hypocrite.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson, being a "man of the people" was a great example after having a relationship with a married woman, attempting to marry her before their divorce, then later remarrying her, attacked the CURRENT president spreading vicious rumors about Adams and his Wife. I can see now why many believe this is a "man of the people"

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

he heard a guy was talking about his wife and he ended up shooting him

i call that sticking up for your wife

Side: Yes
1 point

Jackson employed the spoils system. He gave his supporters high ranking jobs in the government for their votes. He bribed them basically to vote for him. The creation of the spoils act set a harmful pattern for the future presidents.

Side: No
1 point

When Jackson became president he took advantage of the power. For example, he had vetoed more things that all presidents before him. He vetoed the second national bank of the U.S. which not everyone agreed with. He used the veto 12 times in his two terms of presidency.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson and congress passed the Tariff. The Tariff of Abominations as the southerns called it. To the northerns ( his supporters ) it helped with business with other countries. But to the southerns it would mean the rise of goods, which most farmers would not be able to pay. Why is jackson so 'good' when he ruined the economy?

Side: No
1 point

If he was a man of the people then why did he threaten war against S.C? yes they passed the Ordinance of Nullification, but still couldn't he have been more reasonable in the way he approached that? instead of war?

Side: No
1 point

when he forced the natives to move from their homelands and walk thousands of miles to a new place he killed thousands of the natives just so he could have their land

Side: No
1 point

The indian removal act was a major flaw in his ' good guy act ' he threatened people to get his way ( S.C ) he sold slaves to gain money for himself. He was not a good role model, i wouldn't want to follow a man who killed, lied , and cheated his way to victory.

Side: No
1 point

Andrew Jackson doesn't deserve to be on the $20 dollar bill because he has done some cruel and disrespectful things. For example he was the one who caused the Trail of Tears. He wanted the Cherokees off their land so he can give it to the settlers and farmers and the government wanted them off as well because they found gold. He also wanted other tribes off their land and which were relocated to The Indian Territory. The Cherokees took their case to court and the court said they didn't have to move off their land but Andrew being a selfish human being he forced them anyways which was unconstitutional. The Cherokees moved off their land and walked in Harsh weather.

Side: No
1 point

I don't believe that Andrew Jackson deserves to be on the 20 dollar bill. All he is really well known for is for forcibly removing the Native Americans so that he could take their land and destroying the bank. Before he was President, he fought in many battles, like the Battle of Horseshoe Bend and the Battle of New Orleans. As President, he signed the Indian Removal Act, which forced many of the remaining tribes of Native Americans off their land into Oklahoma. When the Cherokee went to court to fight for their freedom non-violently, Jackson still forced them off their territory after the Supreme Court won the case. His famous words were, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!".

People voted for Andrew Jackson because they thought it would be good to have a representative of "the common people". Though he had fought many battles and was greatly respected by some, he wasn't an appropriate choice for president. The President shouldn't be someone who fires all of his workers just because they don't agree with them, and they shouldn't react to every argument by screaming and yelling just so they can feel empowered. Andrew Jackson also promised to give more opportunities to the common people, and he saw the Second Bank of the United States as the main threat to their way of life. So Jackson gets to work to destroy the bank, which leads to a drop in economy and makes life harder for the common people he said he was going to help.

So in general I don't believe that Andrew Jackson should be on our 20 dollar bill. I wouldn't want to remember the temperamental man who killed thousands of Native Americans over land whenever i use a 20 bill.

Side: No
1 point

No, he kinda forced thousands of Native Americans into exile from their own homeland only to undergo racist discrimination and cruel conditions along the Trail of Tears ;(

Side: No
0 points

Andrew Jackson was a dirty president, he did so many wrong things while president and even when he wasn't

Side: No
madij33(22) Disputed
2 points

But, didn't he also do things that benefited the country? Everyone makes mistakes that question their judgement.

Side: Yes
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
1 point

He benefitted some of the country. Like the fact of him putting up tariffs it benefitted the North but it didn't benefit the south.

Side: No
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

I can understand that people make mistakes, but Jackson continued to make mistakes over and over again.

Side: No
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

Yes everyone does make mistakes, but then he should correct the actions instead of continue to try and completely take over the whole country just to let it be supported by one leg. National Debt might have been the support for him, but he caused many other disasters during the situation.

Side: No
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
2 points

But he did good things also. He was a hero and he was hardworking.

Side: Yes
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

He might have been a hardworking man and a hero, but he caused more problems with the countries economy.

Side: No
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
1 point

He did good things at times and was a hero for our country, he worked hard but not hard enough for everyone. Think about all the things he did that were wrong. I feel he had more wrong than right.

Side: No
petersag(22) Disputed
1 point

He only did the things that you see as wrong because it was what had to be done. If he hadn't done these things than things could have gotten much worse.

Side: Yes
browncn(14) Disputed
1 point

Do you have examples to give about what he did that was so "dirty"and/or "wrong"????

Side: Yes
Brandlm(20) Disputed
1 point

He was a slave trader. He went against paper money and the banking system. and he sent native americans away from their homeland. They were there first. Jackson was rude to do so

Side: No
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
1 point

The Trail of Tears he wanted gold and was going to find a way to get it and he didn't want to compromise with the Cherokees so instead he got an agent to go and discuss this matter and the Cherokees were forced to travel through lands where many died and suffered from illnesses

Side: No
huffse(21) Disputed
1 point

The way he used force instead of compromise during the Nullification Crisis. He never wanted to really compromise, just force everything on the lower people.

Side: No
1 point

Jackson did everything necessary to ensure that the Nation was well-off

Side: No
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
1 point

Not necessarily. What about the whole point of him putting out Tariffs. That didn't make the whole Nation well off. it made the north well off because it supported them, now for the south they struggled because they didn't have enough money since manufactures were rose. Yes it got lowered but it didn't help still. At the end they compromised and fixed the problem but they had to wait each year for the price to get back right.

Side: Yes
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

Every president has done something wrong and that doesn't make them a horrible president. They just messed up.

Side: Yes
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
1 point

You have a point, but some of the things that he did shouldn't be done, wanting the Indians to be removed, supporting the people he want to support, and also the bank wars where the states had to support themselves with their own bank and only giving a certain amount of bank deposits. This is too many mistakes

Side: No
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

You can't use "Every one makes mistakes, we're human." as a valid argument. He ignored one of his main jobs. He went against the Constitution, thats what makes him a bad president.

Side: No
1 point

but yet he did so many right things too which over way the wrong.

Side: No
MakailaMS(22) Disputed
1 point

Can I have an example of the right things he have done besides being a war hero.

Side: Yes
0 points

He only did what the things that he did for his reputation

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

well it worked didnt it? he was considered a man of the people

Side: Yes
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

At the same time it helped our country. So win . win? . It helped our country too so you know, its cool.

Side: Yes
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

His supporters surely liked him and obviously supported what he did so it obviously worked...

Side: Yes
ariyonamcm(25) Disputed
1 point

He only did things that would do good for his reputation? I think not sir! No one likes to talk about the good he's done for the north...who i believe were his dedicated supporters. And lets talk about the compromise that he held between the South. Or maybe we should talk about the indian removal act, or the slaves he owned, Since those are the two strongest things people are arguing about besides the tariff of abominations. No one cared for the black people except for a small few good-hearted people, and as much as I hate to say it, thats the facts. And for the indian removal act, besides the court, i don't remember anyone else opposing it besides the indians. And he did not know the outcome would be it as it may, as treacherous as it was.

He has done as much as he could do as president.

Side: Yes
0 points

Jackson did not care about the country he just cared about his self. He wanted to be president more than he wanted the country to succeed.

Side: No
MrOKeefe(27) Disputed
2 points

He was a soldier, so he literally put his life on the line for his country

Side: Yes
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
0 points

Just because he was a soldier does not mean he was a good person... He was hateful to people so no wonder he was a soldier, he liked feeling like he was in control and killing people.

Side: No
petersag(22) Disputed
2 points

Everything he did was for the country. He did his best to keep the country together during times where the country was falling apart.

Side: Yes
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

So he did his best by making his group of friends/supporters in charge instead of people who deserves to be in charge?

Side: No
Parrishtm(23) Disputed
1 point

He was a war hero a soldier and he tried his hardest to do what was right he gave people jobs he opened banks where people could get money and he expanded the American territory

Side: Yes
hunikejm(20) Disputed
1 point

He told his men to scalp the enemies because of there victory.

Side: No
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

He only gave his supporters jobs. So what about the people who didn't support him? Did they get well paying jobs? No.

Side: No
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

Why put someone on the money that the federal government print if they didn't think that the federal government should print the money?

Side: No
hatcherzj(22) Disputed
1 point

He got us out of debt though. That would benefit the country so I think he did care.

Side: Yes
1 point

he actually got the country out of national debt though..

Side: No
Jacksonzn(20) Disputed
1 point

But he also was the main reason why hundreds of people died ..

Side: Yes
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

why would he want to be president for no reason? when people run for president its because they love this country and they think they can make it better. he did what he thought was best, and thats all anyone can ask for

Side: Yes
0 points

Andrew Jackson does not deserve to be on a $20 bill. During his presidency he caused more harm than good.

Side: No
madij33(22) Disputed
2 points

In whose opinion? I think Andrew Jackson did more good things then bad.

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
0 points

Jackson clearly went against the constitution while forcing Cherokees to leave their land AFTER the Supreme Court said they could stay. As the President his job was to follow up on the Supreme Court orders, which he failed to do. He refused to recharter the National Bank which caused businesses to fail, it caused them to lose money. ALSO it caused a loss of jobs.

Side: No
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
2 points

yes he did, He kept the government together during the Nullification Crisis

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
0 points

He sent naval ships to the Charleston Harbor and threatened that if any blood was spilled over this, he would take the first person he saw fighting and hang them from the nearest tree.

Side: No
womblejt(10) Disputed
1 point

Jackson had great contributions to this country he expanded out economy by expanding out land area for farming.

Side: Yes
mikaelawade(22) Disputed
1 point

How did he cause more harm then good? He tried to keep his supporters happy.

Side: Yes
1 point

and not only did he try and keep his supporters happy, he continuously tried to win support from those who opposed him when he didn't have to.

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

Yes, he did try to keep his supporters happy. He tried to keep them happy by refusing to recharter the national back causing a downfall in the economy.

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
1 point

Jackson gave people more land to grow food, he got rid of the national debt, he was a war hero and when the people wanted the national bank out he got rid of it for them. He did what he could to be a good president and help the people. He might have slipped up a couple of times but he's human and humans make mistakes.

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

Jackson FORCED people out of their land that they were PROMISED way before he was even President so that we could grow more food? When he did this he made them go to a territory in the Louisiana Purchase, that was untouched. If there was already free land, why couldn't we have just farmed over there?

Side: No
burnettedf(20) Disputed
1 point

how he payed off the national debt no other president has done that

that's a good thing

Side: Yes
Daniel_T(23) Disputed
1 point

Maybe in your opinion but the way a lot of people see it is that he helped out a lot more than people realize by expanding our land and keeping our economy under control.

Side: Yes
0 points

Jackson does not have deserve the $20 bill because he was very cruel to Native Americans.

Side: No
1 point

but he had to do what he had to do for what was best for America.

Side: No
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

Removing the Native Americans from their land was not the best thing for America.

Side: Yes
1 point

Taylor is exactly right. What he did was the best for America and it helped the economy.

Side: No
LydiaCone(21) Disputed
1 point

If you had the choice to fight for the people you govern or just let them suffer for the good of other people what would you do? He did what he needed to give the Americans what they needed. He gave them land they needed to grow food that they could've died without. I don't see that as being a bad President. He was making sure he took care of his country first.

Side: Yes
1 point

That is very true. To grow the amount of food that our expanding country needed, we needed more land.

Side: Yes
isaacsaleh(22) Disputed
1 point

He gave americans more land by removing the natives americans

Side: Yes
Tapiao(23) Disputed
1 point

It is true that he gave americans more land, but the way he did it was very cruel and cold-hearted.

Side: No
petersag(22) Disputed
1 point

Look at all the good things that he did during his presidency though. He helped the American people and was a in the government for them.

Side: Yes
Zoeklewis(24) Disputed
1 point

He did not help the people, he gave them what they wanted. He spoiled them pretty much. Nothing he did helped the people in the long run, except for fight in a war before he became president.

Side: No
underwoodhm(2) Disputed
1 point

everyone was cruel to the native Americans! they all owned slaves and treated them terribly. that was socially accepted back then

Side: Yes
AlanH(9) Disputed
1 point

Just because something is socially accepted does not make it okay to do. To many people I know (not applying to me), making fun of gay people is socially accepted, but does it make it right to do? Was it socially accepted to forcefully remove Natives from their home? Yes. But was it morally right? Just because they have a different skin color does not mean that their blood, bones, heart, lungs, and anything else is different. They are still human beings with beating hearts and life inside them.

Side: No
browncn(14) Disputed
1 point

One action that he thought was right shouldn't justify his right to be on the $20 bill.

Side: Yes