Hillary Clinton would have won the Presidency of the United States over Donald Trump.

Secondly, though, I believe that my opponent had a slight typo when phrasing the resolution and meant to state, "Hillary Clinton should have won the Presidency of the United States over Donald Trump. " If I am incorrect in this statement, my opponent can correct me and I will delve into further argumentation on why this is incorrect grammar. With that established we will examine several off case points and then look at some on case refutation by examining my opponent's arguments. Resolutional Analysis: Because we are talking why or why not Trump or Clinton should have won the election, this debate should stay based only on the facts of the election (campaign, platforms, scandals, policies, etc. ) Simply put, Pro should not be allowed to bring up whether or not Trump has instituted his campaign stances or anything like that because that would be outside the bounds of the resolution. Contention 1: The Outsider For years the American people have been told by politicians that they will go into office and get the job done. Donald Trump ran off the platform that he was anti-establishment. This resonated with voters throughout the country. His phrase, "Drain the Swamp" was chanted by his followers at rallies because the American people were tired of the same people, making the same promises, running for office and then not fulfilling any of it. Trump should have and did win the election because he was able to connect with what voters wanted on the issue of not being an inside politician. This goes hand in hand with my second contention. [1] Contention 2: Political Correctness Not only were the American people tired of the insiders making the same promises and not fulfilling them; they were also tired of politicians being politically correct. He was successfully able to take strong stances and say things that most politicians would never dare say. He communicated what the people wanted to hear. Yes, he communicated by not using political language but rather using the language of the people. In fact, one of his opponents, Bernie Sanders, said that this one of the major reasons Trump won. Sanders said, "[Trump] said he will not be politically correct. I think he said some outrageous and painful things, but I think people are tired of the same old politically correct rhetoric. I think some people believe he was speaking from his heart and willing to take on everybody. " Now lets examine the third reason why Trump should have and did win. [2] Contention 3: Ousting of Fake News This is pretty simple. Major news media corps. obviously tainted the news towards Hillary Clinton. Trump repeatedly emphasized this at campaign speeches and debates. Once again, he communicated what the people had been wanting to hear for years. Not only did this help him, but just look at the current ranking of CNN in prime time ratings. CNN trails Nick at Nite and Yogi Bear reruns. Simply put, the fake news ousting helped boost Donald Trump's "ratings" among the people. [3] [4] Contention 4: Policies Trump's tough stance on trade and immigration gave the American people more reason to vote for Trump. Trump ran off the platform of bringing more jobs back, boosting the American economy, and securing the American borders. This platform was something that people were willing to rally behind. People were sick and tired of thousands of jobs being outsourced. Trump promised to bring back jobs. Hillary Clinton on the other hand was caught contradicting herself when talking about the coal industry v. the solar industry. This allowed Trump to come and promise both industries the ability and opportunity to grow. He also was able to rally voters behind the idea of building a wall. The American people had been asking for years to increase border security and the Democratic party sat back and did nothing. He once again communicated to the American people the message that they wanted to hear. [5] Now let's move into some of my opponents arguments First off he talked about how she has inspiring words and I agree. But at the end of day, what Trump was able to hammer home to the American people is that those are just words. A lot of politicians have inspiring words. but they don't fulfill them. He was able to successfully show to the American people that all she has done her entire life is promise things, and then not fulfill her promises. My opponent contended that she was the first person nominated by a major political party. This is simply a fact and there is no reason to prefer. If a dog ran for office and was nominated by the Democratic party, just because he was the first dog nominated by that party gives the American people no reason to prefer the dog over the other party. This is simply an appeal to say that because she is a woman, therefore we should vote for which simply does not make sense. Next my opponent contended that she has been elected into many offices. Once again, Donald Trump hammered this home. Yes, she was elected into many offices but has done essentially nothing. Unfulfilled promises and corruption is what she leaves behind her. As I talked about in my first and second contention, the American people wanted an outsider who was not politically correct. Hillary Clinton was the exact opposite. My opponents final point was that she had the courage to do what no other woman has done. This is simply hearsay until backed up with evidence because many women have run for the President of the US. Pro must provide quotes by every single woman who has run for President that they did not have the courage or even the want to win the Presidency if Pro expects to win this point. It is because Trump struck a chord that the American people wanted, he should have won the Presidency. Thank you, and I await the Pro's response. [1] . https://www.usatoday.com... [2] . http://reason.com... [3] . http://thefederalist.com... [4] . http://www.zerohedge.com... [5] . https://qz.com...