Instigator / Pro

ramdatt

1360

rating

debates

0.0%

won

Topic

#1902

Devin Nunes

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 4 votes and with 23 points ahead, the winner is...

oromagi

Tags

Politics

Parameters

Publication date: 04.10.2020 05:35PM
Last updated date: 04.28.2020 03:34AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 2
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: Two weeks
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

oromagi

1922

rating

117

debates

97.44%

won

Description

God's gift to the civil courtroom

Round 1

ramdatt

04.12.2020 05:36PM

Pro

Forfeited

oromagi

04.13.2020 08:38PM

Con

Thanks, ramdatt!

THBT: DEVIN NUNES is GOD's GIFT to the CIVIL COURTROOM

PRO has forfeited the opening round, forcing CON to define the term of this debate

DEFINITIONS:

DEVIN NUNES is the U.S. Representative for California's 22nd congressional district, Trump stooge, and ranking minority-party member of the House Intelligence Committee during the 2019 impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump while corruptly failing to disclose his presence in some of the meetings and on some of the phone calls under investigation.

GOD is "conceived of as the supreme being, creator deity, and principal object of faith. God is usually conceived as being omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), omnipresent (all-present) and as having an eternal and necessary existence. God is most often held to be incorporeal (immaterial).

In agnosticism, the existence of God is deemed unknown or unknowable. Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God"

GIFT is "something given to another voluntarily, without charge"

CIVIL COURT is "a court dealing with cases in civil law"

BURDEN of PROOF:

Wikipedia advises:

"When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo."

CON interprets the resolution to mean that PRO must prove that God has voluntarily offered Nunes to some civil court

ARG 1.1 PRO MUST PROVE GOD EXITS

ARG 1.2 PRO MUST CREDIBLY ESTABLISH KNOWLEDGE/INSIGHT INTO GOD's INTENTIONS REGARDING NUNES and SOME CIVIL COURT(S) SOMEWHERE

CONCLUSION

Since CON expects that PRO will be unwilling or unable to prove GOD, PRO's thesis must fail

CON looks forward to PRO's R2 reply

SOURCES

Round 2

ramdatt

04.13.2020 09:17PM

Pro

Devin Nunes is really a child who needs attention from his mommy.

Too bad he has become a burden on society.

oromagi

04.14.2020 02:48AM

Con

THBT: DEVIN NUNES is GOD's GIFT to the CIVIL COURTROOM

PRO has forfeited the opening round

ARG 1.1 PRO MUST PROVE GOD EXITS

PRO has made no reply

ARG 1.2 PRO MUST CREDIBLY ESTABLISH KNOWLEDGE/INSIGHT INTO GOD's INTENTIONS REGARDING NUNES and SOME CIVIL COURT(S) SOMEWHERE

PRO has made no reply

COUNTER 2.1

Devin Nunes is really a child who needs attention from his mommy

Devin Nunes is 46 years old

Too bad he has become a burden on society.

Is there anything less useful in an emergency than a corrupt politician?

CONCLUSION

PRO has failed to prove that God has voluntarily offered Nunes to some civil court

VOTING

PRO barely engaged in this debate, offered no organized argument, no sources, insufficient spelling and grammar to judge and bad conduct by forfeit
CON would like to thank ramdatt for the GIFT
Thanks to all VOTERS for their kind consideration

SOURCES

oromagi

04.28.2020 03:34AM

#10

-->

@fauxlaw

the longer the streak, the greater the fall

fauxlaw

04.28.2020 03:28AM

-->

@oromagi

Are you getting tired of winning, yet? Nope, keep it up

oromagi

04.28.2020 03:27AM

-->

@Barney

@Trent0405

@fauxlaw

Many thanks for voting!

ramdatt

04.14.2020 10:44PM

This ultra rightwing website is so humble They call themselves...

BEST ONLINE DEBATING SITE

If that is true, we are in deep trouble!

oromagi

04.14.2020 10:34PM

prisoner+Minoan island+famous Rodin

ramdatt

04.13.2020 09:15PM

Debateart.com should be renamed to...

TRUMP ARSE KISSERS UNITED

ramdatt

04.13.2020 08:42PM

oromagi

You do a great job copying and pasting from Wikipedia...

Congratulations...

Too bad you live in an alternate universe where all you do is worship that useless person in the White House.

ramdatt

04.12.2020 05:57PM

One of these days, User_2006 will stop obsessing over the top debater and actually add something meaningful to a debate.

ramdatt

04.11.2020 05:03PM

For Devin Nunes...

Suing isn't everything, it is the only thing

User_2006

04.10.2020 05:52PM

Gosh, it seems so strange having the top debater debating so much at once consider most of the time the one with the most potential is also the one quiet. It just seems strange.

RationalMadman

04.14.2020 09:26PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Virtually an FF, laziness and Round 1 forfeit from Pro give Con the conduct.

Pro doesn't address anything in Con's arguments, in fact he makes it clear that this debate was intended as satire on the part of Pro. While playing devil's advocate is acceptable, it's not acceptable to completely break out of character and virtually concede like that.

Only Con used sources.

fauxlaw

04.14.2020 06:26AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Argument: Pro offered virtually no argument, but for libelous attack against Nunes. Conoffered reasoned arguments. points to Con

Sources: Pro offered no sources. Con, well eresearched and cited sources. Points to Con

S&G: The sheer volume of Con's arguments offered greater risk of S&G error. Points to Con

Conduct: Pro: disrespect to Nunes, for wasting Con's time with a debate Pro clearly instigated, but to which contributed noting of a positive argument to support his case, and to me for having to review childish slurs.

Barney

04.14.2020 04:59AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

The only real subject this debate came down to was the age of the guy. Pro asserts he's a child, con proves (with sources) he is middle aged. Conduct for forfeiture.

Trent0405

04.14.2020 04:09AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Pro dropped all of Con's points without making a legitimate argument himself. So Con wins arguments.

Conduct to Con because Pro forfeited.