I am pro-rank choice voting
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 11 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Rank Choice Voting means that instead of picking person a or person b or person c, you would award a, b, and c all ranked top down points rather than 1 - 0 -0, it would be 1 - .5 -.25. Ultimately, the favored candidate would win and not the “lesser of two evils”. We would have more favorable presidents and really anyone who we elect using this system.
This is just a Foregone Conclusion, and I could easily leave it at that, but I am going to give a little bit of feedback to Pro.
First of all, you just waived the first round completely unnecessarily and let your opponent have a free extra round. Why?
Second of all, you didn't actually do anything to prove your case. As the one arguing the affirmative position regarding the resolution, you have the Burden of Proof, meaning that you have to try and prove that RCV should be enacted. However, the only thing you did to try and prove this was to simply state that we would get better candidates elected rather than just the lesser of two evils. That sounds good, but you didn't actually do anything to PROVE that this is true. You can't just state your conclusions and leave the work you did to get there as an exercise for the reader. This is a competitive debate. You actually have to substantiate your case! But you didn't even bother to do that here.
On the other hand, Con clearly did put some actual effort in and described some actual downsides to RCV, such as lower turnout and delayed election results. Con wins this one in a landslide.
The proponent did not provide a substantial argument or any sources. Additionally, I found their conduct to be somewhat unprofessional.
---
---
---
Please vote.
Yeah, it goes up when comment is posted.
Test
Bump
You are literally giving me a 1 round advantage? That's pretty arrogant
I guess when it's my turn to post
Done. When do you wanna post the link?
I need 1 week rounds
OK. Post the link.
Literally just be cool with me posting a link to a video. I would want to see if Casey accepts first though
"I will accept if you allow me to use videos for my round. I just want to record my response to you."
Not sure how to do that.
Pro-? How much do you think it should be applied?
I am sure most Pro-something people know their restraint and boundaries. For example, a pro-choice person will probably not condone the act of aborting a child one day before supposed delivery, and regular pro-Palestine people will probably be less extreme than Hamas.
What I am really saying is that your position is too flawed to even be called one.
I was trying to remember the name for this. Thank you!
Please do. I am sick of people trying to ruin democracy with RCV
I might take this one. Consider me interested.
I guess, the only problem is that average voter is brainless.
So far elections were almost always a choice between 2 persons, which is close to dictatorship.
I will accept if you allow me to use videos for my round. I just want to record my response to you.