CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
It appears at first glance that you are basically stating that what made Trump bad in your mind does not make Biden bad vecause you're a raging hypocrite. Right?
It appears at first glance that you are basically stating that what made Trump bad in your mind does not make Biden bad vecause you're a raging hypocrite. Right?
It appears as though nothing you say has a hint of credibility because for the last four years you have shilled for a man who has lied more than any president in history, incited violent riots, and learned about leadership by reading literature written by Adolf Hitler.
Lied more than any president: Would have to be taken a more a face value than one of fact, seeing as when those list come up. They are mostly comprised of not only indirect statements, but comments, jokes, and even his own opinions on matters that are not facts.
You would also need to prove that he "incited violent riots" before stating such as fact. And on the note of reading books written by people like Adolf Hitler, you'd have to explain how something so tame can be so bad. Because many people read such books as part of their own class studies, or just to find a way at picking the mans brain.
But other then that, the whole Trump/Nazi thing. Has gotten extremely old and has only become a long dead horse after these last four years.
Lied more than any president: Would have to be taken a more a face value than one of fact, seeing as when those list come up.
Sure. Granted, political fact checking is a recent phenomena. It began around 2008.
You would also need to prove that he "incited violent riots" before stating such as fact.
Of course this is a blatant logical fallacy, since you are deliberately trying to change the setting where this claim took place. It did not take place in a court of law and there is no burden of proof on me to substantiate it. Thankfully, I am still entitled to have my own opinion, and so Donald Trump has been quite unsuccessful in that regard.
Proving Trump's guilt would be fairly easy to do if it were possible to try him like any ordinary citizen. Unfortunately, as you know full well, his culpability is decided on the basis of a vote from a senate controlled by members of his own party. And they still voted 57-43 in favour of him being guilty. Hardly encouraging numbers for anybody trying to make an argument that he just "accidentally" told rioters to descend on the Capitol and fight like hell.
The issue here for you, is that he didn't tell rioters to do any such thing. More so for the fact that the phrase "fight like hell" is still just as politically neutral that it barely deserves mentioning. Had he actually told them to tear down the doors and cause some damage, then he'd be culpable to what transpired. But as it sit's, we know that there was a group of people already attempting to break into the capitol before his speech was even fully underway. Not to mention the presence of far-left agitators in the rioters ranks as well.
So all you're doing is spreading a false narrative, that you can't actually support, and lamenting the fact that he was acquitted.
But other then that, the whole Trump/Nazi thing. Has gotten extremely old
I am sure you think so, but the facts illustrate very clearly that Donald Trump has continuously copied, borrowed and paraphrased Hitler's rhetoric for the last four years.
So have multiple president throughout America's history. Even Obama's address for unification after the BLM riots, could be easily phrased over to what Hitler could be hear saying, throughout several of his own speeches.
The fact of the matter her, is that continually trying to suggest that Trump is in any way relatable to Hitler. Is probably one of the most intellectually weak arguments that someone can make, today.
And why is the national guard there? Oh yeah, Trump incited a riot that threatened to hang VP Pence, stormed the capitol building, spread shit all over the place, killed a police officer...hmm.....
No he didn't. This is not a political issue, but a sin issue. Because humans are in active rebellions against Yeshua, their sin results in death and destruction. Read the KJV Book of Romans, and learn what I am saying. Now I do not auto agree with Former President Trump, but I don't think it's fair to infer that he is some terrorist, despot, basically. Like I said, I am a centrist Republican, and I voted for Trump, but I will happily give mad respect to a centrist or a leftist, or a libertaraian, if I think they do somthing to to help humans, or animals. That said, I do universally conderm all acts of terror, regardless, of belief, whether it is religious, political, or philisophical.
I don't know what you are talking, about. Try again.........................................................................................................
I don't know what you are talking, about. Try again
I'm saying you frequently refer to the thousands of peaceful protesters who are part of Antifa and/or BLM as "terrorists", yet when it comes to a man who incited an insurrection against democracy you don't want to infer that he is a terrorist.
I support people who peacefully protest, and hold a Black Lives Matter Sign, or Antifa sign, but but I am only refering, to rioters, when I object. I am sorry, for the misunderstanding, please.
I support people who peacefully protest, and hold a Black Lives Matter Sign, or Antifa sign
No you don't you fucking liar. You carpet brushed the entire of Antifa and BLM with the exact same accusation of being terrorists. You did not distinguish between the peaceful and the violent. In fact you implied that merely being part of one of those organisations makes a person violent.
I don't think it's fair to infer that he is some terrorist, despot, basically.
Trump signed a 330 billion arms deal with the Saudis who’s human rights abuses are appalling the double standards of Americans is breathtaking as the wag their moral finger at everyone they deem immoral but exclude themselves from such rigorous condemnation
Also I find it amusing that you still adore Trump a man who’s best buddy and wingman was Jeffery Epstein ......but you’re a “Christian “ aren’t you?
I respect your assertaion, but many countries have both human, animal, and environmental rights abuses, so we should encourage everyone, to govern with respect, to Yeshua given, rights.
Who in the middle east would make for a more moral, but equally strong ally with whom to sign arms deals?
A strong ally? Surely you mean more immoral
The US and Saudi have never signed a treaty or a mutual defense pact, and the relationship between them has never gone beyond a narrow partnership on select issues.
Saudis alleged strategic utility is far more uncertain and limited than most realize.
Thats something you want me to work out and the highest placed advisors in the US best opinions on the matter pick Saudi Arabia.
Basically what you’re asking is “can you pick another country that can as effectively keep American arms employees in steady lucrative employment as well as Saudi”
Clearly you disagree with those top advisors, but can't figure a better alternative.
Shut up Amarel. Wanting an ally in the region is not an acceptable excuse to be legitimising barbaric regimes like Saudi Arabia. Or even Israel for that matter.
There it is. When the only real choices are barbaric regimes, just remove yourself altogether. Cede any influence in the region to the good guys in China.
"Or even Israel for that matter" haha. Go fuckin figure.
There it is. When the only real choices are barbaric regimes
If the only real choices are barbaric regimes then why would you ally with any of them you retard? You are literally so stupid that you cannot write a full paragraph without contradicting yourself.
I have mere moments ago responded to your baseless accusation that I "don't care about saving lives", and now I'm reading you try to justify alliances with barbaric regimes on the grounds that, "Well, they are all barbaric around those parts." Amazing how you can think your own racism/anti-Islamic bigotry justifies supporting one of the most brutal Islamic regimes around, but then again your hypocrisy is simply without borders or limitations, isn't it?
If the only real choices are barbaric regimes then why would you ally with any of them you retard?
If an entire region has barbaric regimes, and those regimes impact other parts of the world, it behoves any nation capable to do what is necessary to influence that region.
Well, they are all barbaric around those parts
If you didn't think so, you'd be able to give a real alternative (hint: Bahrain and the like don't have serious regional influence)
Which is yet more of your completely empty rhetoric where you simply invent your own facts, self-qualify them as true, then expect everybody else to simply believe you. Why are the regimes of Iraq and Afghanistan barbaric? You supported a very costly war to "bring democracy" (😆) to those countries, yet you are sitting there with a straight face telling me Saudi Arabia is a better ally because these regions you "brought democracy" to are more brutal, yes? What a laughable mess of self-contradictory trash.
Listen bro, Iran can get into the UN (in fact it was a founding member state). Israel can get into the UN. North Korea can get into the UN. All the other Arab countries can get into the UN. But Saudi Arabia can't. That butchers your idea that Saudi Arabia is the best of a bad bunch and simply exposes you once again as the dribbling, far right extremist idiot that you are.
So, on the authority of the UN, you recommend Iran then? It's the only viable option of the ones you listed.
And I didn't support bringing democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan. That's really bad foreign policy. But the wars were legal and the UN has no authority.
I'm sorry buddy, but are you arguing that you are a better authority than the United Nations?
you recommend Iran then?
I certainly don't recommend them after eighty years of sponsoring a country which assassinates their civilians, no. I'd say that idea flatlined in 1988 when Donald Rumsfeld sold Saddam Hussein chemical and biological weapons in the hope he would use them on the Iranians (which he did of course).
And I didn't support bringing democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Stop lying for once. Debating liars is as time consuming as it is pointless.
It's the only viable option of the ones you listed.
I specifically told you that all of the Arab countries are members of the UN except Saudi Arabia, whose application was rejected for a litany of war crimes and human rights violations. Stop inventing your own facts please.
Who in the middle east would make for a more moral
😆😆😆
Yes buddy. What or who could possibly be more moral than a regime which murders journalists, jails activists, censors speech, tortures suspects, discriminates against women and cuts people's hands off for stealing food? As always it's a fine question from you.
The asylum called. They want their Benzos, back............................................................................................................
Where were you, when Obama, played pattycakes, with Iran
If you mean where was I when Obama was successfully negotiating a deal which specifically forbid Iran enriching enough uranium to build a nuclear bomb, then I was at home cheering him on. But you just keep watching Fox News dear. They'd never lie to you.
Iran is weeks away from having a nuke, try again.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
So the Former President should have kissed, Iran's, ass?
You were complaining about Iran building a nuclear bomb and that is the fault of the former president for reneging on the deal which stopped Iran from doing that. Does that compute you stupid bitch?
Can you tell me what ethnolinguistics also known as linguistic anthropology?....................................................................................................................................
I don't particularly care who is filling your head with this retarded shit, dear. The fact is that you're dangerously ignorant and have a head full of extremist far right propaganda.
Propaganda, is run by the state meaning, the government. .................................................................................................
Come on. Every time you get mad you threaten to shoot people.
I just support mentally stable nonfelons having the right to do so.
Here's something you probably haven't realised, but every single felon in American history was at one point in their lives a non-felon. They become felons after they have done the damage, so it does their victims a fat lot of good if you take their gun away after they've used it to shoot people.
I am, whatever you say I am, and if I wasn't, then why would I say I am, in the paper, in the news, everyday I am, I don't know, that's just the why, I am. -Eminem in his song The Way I Am
No he didn't. This is not a political issue, but a sin issue. Because humans are in active rebellions against Yeshua, their sin results in death and destruction.
Dana, you literally sound like someone plucked you from the third century and you don't yet realise we no longer blame the gods for bad weather and infertility. You are sprouting absolute nonsense dear.
No he didn't. This is not a political issue, but a sin issue. Because humans are in active rebellions against Yeshua, their sin results in death and destruction.
This is probably a stupid question, but how do you rationalise this idea to yourself while at the same time you believe Jesus died for our sins? I thought he gave us a pass on sinning.
Also, I think it is quite unfair that we get blamed for being sinners if God created us that way. That's a bit like building a bike without wheels and then cursing it when it won't work.
That's a complete lie dear. He created man in his own image, so if man is a sinner then so is God.
He gave us free will
No he didn't. Free will is an illusion brought about through the way we experience time. You can't produce any evidence that free will exists just like you can't produce any evidence God exists, or produce any evidence to support anything you ever say. In short, you've gone crazy and you are trying to persuade all the other people you meet to be crazy too.
Free will is not an illusion, or we would not be on this site.
That's nice. Equally, the Earth is flat otherwise we would not be on this site. Making up stupid analogies is a forte of mine so you picked the wrong guy for a stupid analogy war.
Unfortunately, after what we've seen with the democrats doing their best to cram these men and women into such intolerable conditions. Because the last I was able to see, was that they were limited to sleeping in parking decks. While only having very bare necessities at their disposal.
It sure does appear that way, at the very least. That Trump is attempting to do his best by way of these people. Who're being forced into such conditions by the democrats at this point.
