CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:22
Arguments:23
Total Votes:27
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (14)

Debate Creator

Chinaman(1712) pic



Thought the Democrats opposed billionaires and enter Michael Bloomberg

The Democrats rail against the rich but do they support a Rich White Billionaire that is a Democrat 2020 candidate.
What are the Democrats going to do about this issue.
As of November 2019 his net worth is 58 billion dollars making him the 9th richest person in America and the 14th richest person in the world.

How is it that the Democrats identity politics is going to work out here.

Add New Argument
2 points

Now this will be fun to watch as the Democrats attack the Rich White Democrat who is running for president in 2020.

What's also funny is Dems claim to embrace diversity, yet all the front-runners for 2020 are old white people. Go figure.

1 point

Dems claim to embrace diversity, yet all the front-runners for 2020 are old white people. Go figure.

Mhm. And Republicans claim to be against gay marriage, yet a significant number of them are closet homosexuals. Go figure.

Chinaman(1712) Clarified
2 points

Does a Brain Dead Brit not notice that the Democrats will have a problem with a Rich White Democrat.

Chinaman(1712) Clarified
1 point

Brit has your DNA not allowed you to notice that Bloomberg is a Rich White Democrat.

Chinaman(1712) Clarified
1 point

Why is it Democrats have to be Closet Homosexuals when Gay Marriage is legal in all 59 states.

HighFalutin(2922) Clarified
1 point

The party is, but some engage in their own private behavior. The democratic candidates represent the entire liberal spectrum and they chose old and white.

Chinaman(1712) Clarified
1 point

Dems do have a lot of issues that are hard for them to figure out.

Rich White Dems are total confusion for them.

they are looking for their own billionaire to go against Trump ;)

Chinaman(1712) Clarified
1 point

But the Democrats oppose billionaires so help me out with their insane thoughts.

They are not insane. They are hypocrites ;)

1 point

The Dem(on)s have changed tack and have decided to adopt the old adage;-If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

A blockbuster battle between the nation's billionaire titans would be a monumental event.

1 point

Some believe the old adage, "we must fight fire with fire".

There are several wealthy capitalists that do good things with their money, appreciate the country that gave them the ability to get rich. Then there are some who would sell that country to get richer. We chose the wrong one this time. Trump IS "the chosen one", Putin chose him! I hope WE can choose the next one, whether s/he/it is rich OR poor. We can't stand another bad one. :-(

1 point

There are several wealthy capitalists that do good things with their money, appreciate the country that gave them the ability to get rich. Then there are some who would sell that country to get richer.

Alfie, you are right, but at the same time, are you surprised about this? Are you surprised that a system which nurtures and rewards the love of money produces people willing to do anything for it?

FromWithin(8223) Disputed
0 points

You are correct, we can not stand for another Democrat that supports killing viable babies for any reason.

The depravity of the Democrat Party and their fake news Liberal media is effecting our young people and culture.

Rich or poor does not matter when it comes to the Presidency. What matters is humanity, and Trump is the first President we have had that truly fights for our unborn.

The first thing he did when elected was to stop billions of tax payer dollars paying for abortions around the world. He stopped tax payer dollars going to Planned Parenthood's abortion trade.

He will keep the Hyde Amendment the law of the land. He is the greatest defender of humanity in our lifetimes.

He meets the criteria to run for office, so he's running for office. Democrats don't need to like him for him to run as one. The real question will be his success in the polls. Trying to write off a group as hypocrites because a single individual self-identifies with that group is illogical, for it places an impossible burden of agency on an issue over which they have no agency.

Put another way, if a Republican were to Tweet, "The Holohoax never happened!1! #TRUMP2020", would that tweet immediately turn all Republicans into Holocaust deniers? No, because individuals have agency over their own actions, not over the actions of others.

This line of thought also evinces a failure to understand the difference between individuals and groups, resulting in the fallacious tendency of conflating individual decisions and beliefs with those of their peers.