US Political debate thread

[gavsword]

This is a response to both the US Democratic Party: Evil Incarnate, and US Republican Party: Evil Incarnate.

My goal is to have a balanced thread where people actually think and have evidence before posting

Here's the rules.
- 3 teams of debaters (Republican, Democrat, Other)
- 1 Topic at a time
- All topics will last 1 week
- No more than 3 consecutive posts by a team
- If a team does not reply within three days, the rule above is void
- All posts from the teams must have cited sources. These sources cannot be: FOX, Wikipedia, MSN, or blogs
- If one side can post proof that a source one team uses is biased, and that it has no other sources, that post will be removed
- Any posts will be removed if offensive towards another debater
- All topics will be suggested and voted upon by a weekly poll.
- Teams can change every week. Substitutions/rotations will happen over the weekend

Frankly I would like to participate in this, and would like someone less biased to run it, but if no one is willing to do that then I will run it as fair as possible

Any questions?

What should the first topic be?

Sign Ups for Weeks 2 and 3
Sign-up Closed!


Teams for Week 1:
Other: PoLkaTulK, LongDono
Republican: Five in One, BluePriest, PoLkaTulK
Democrat: Essence, Neopergoss

Co-Moderator: doublecross

Current Topic is Current Events

Next week's topic is Cyber security

PM me other topic ideas before Tuesday

[Ele124]

This whole section is for debating politics in general. Please mention in the title that this is specifically debating US politics.

EDIT: Thanx

[gavsword]

Sorry, thank you for pointing that out

[Kuu]

Are signups supposed to be PMs to you gavsword or should they just be posted here.

I'd like to participate (if I may) and sign up as "other" so long as the topics are political issues and not merely "which party is evil" discussions.

[BluePriest]

I love how everyones ready to bash other peoples beliefs, and yet this topic has been up a couple days now, and no one has posted an actual issue to discuss lol.

[Essence]

Issues to discuss:

How to successfully reduce the US employment rate to pre-recession levels. [/li] How to deal with the need for enhanced social safety nets for long-term unemployed people until the above goal is accomplished.[/li] How to deal with the approaching breach of the debt ceiling and the resultant collapse of the US economy. [/li] Economics 101: Do tax cuts for the wealthy actually stimulate economic growth?  On the other side, does giving money to the very poor actually stimulate economic growth? [/li]

Really, until those basic economic/job based questions get addressed, no one in the country gives a flying f*** about anything else, period.

[gavsword]

Are signups supposed to be PMs to you gavsword or should they just be posted here.

I'd like to participate (if I may) and sign up as "other" so long as the topics are political issues and not merely "which party is evil" discussions.

Just post it here.

I love how everyones ready to bash other peoples beliefs, and yet this topic has been up a couple days now, and no one has posted an actual issue to discuss lol.

A day, not too big of a deal.

Issues to discuss:

How to successfully reduce the US employment rate to pre-recession levels. [/li] How to deal with the need for enhanced social safety nets for long-term unemployed people until the above goal is accomplished.[/li] How to deal with the approaching breach of the debt ceiling and the resultant collapse of the US economy. [/li] Economics 101: Do tax cuts for the wealthy actually stimulate economic growth?  On the other side, does giving money to the very poor actually stimulate economic growth? [/li]

Really, until those basic economic/job based questions get addressed, no one in the country gives a flying f*** about anything else, period.

I'll add these to a poll

[BluePriest]

I think Health Care is a good topic as well. Its in th news again today (although I forget the last time it WASNT in the news lol)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110119/ts_yblog_theticket/behind-the-health-care-repeal-vote

[gavsword]

Added, now will anyone sign up lol?

[doublecross]

First of all, I would like to co-moderate with whomever else would like to moderate.

Secondly, I like the rule about citations, except for one thing:
logic can be entirely based on working from a set of premises.


I think cited sources should be required for adding new factual information.

However, if someone would like to talk about how it is their belief that cutting personal income taxes could discourage additional labour because fewer hours are required to receive the same pay, that should be allowed.

If someone would like to respond by saying that they respectfully disagree because a cut in taxes would mean that one gains more income per hour, and thus has more of an incentive to work, that should also be allowed.


What should NOT be allowed is posts like the following:
Taxes are bad beacuse they take money from people. LOLOLOL you are stupid for not realizing that duh. It is so teh obvius fact     

[BluePriest]

I sorta agree with this, except for one thing. If someone expresses their opinion, and then facts are introduced that show their opinion wrong, then they should have to retract it. However, until then, i really dont see much problem with speaking in the realm of hypotheticals, because it is impossible to have facts for everything, especially if the issue is political.

EDIT
It would have to be the disgression of the moderators to what is considered a reasonable opinion, and something that has no real basis. aka if it makes sense, unless proven otherwise keep it, but if it doesnt, then let it be thrown out.

[Essence]

Discretion.  Not disgression.  But yes, I agree.