Liberals tend to place emotion over logic more than other political identities

My Opponent Commits a Bare Assertion FallacyI would like to draw attention to the fact that this debate also requires proof of the claims made. My opponent simply has not offered proof to conclude objectively that in fact democrats (or liberals) are more "emotional" than conservatives. As such, her simplistic opinions --thou she is entitled to them .. and I know how much Republicans HATE entitlements -- they are just that; her opinions and nothing more. If that is the case, due to her having BOP, I have already won before this has even started. Nothing she had submitted is in line with any facts, just a stereotype against the left more than anything. Concerning The Major Issues Today Conservatives are more known for being ideological. More-so than liberals. For example, the recent Obamacare issues online illustrate my point. Under Bush for a comparison, Medicaid part D came into effect, which was more unpopular with the populace, and was even less successful than Obamacare online. Instead of claiming that Republicans are stupid, liberals tried to assist as many people to register for it as possible, knowing how much of an essential role it plays. [http://www.politifact.com...] Instead my opponent is trying to make you believe that this is somehow more emotionally ran than logical. I have to ask the audience, how is it logical to complain someone is being an idiot, instead of helping them? If it isn't, then in this situation one must conclude that liberals were in fact more logical as a result. Otherwise, you'd have to argue that whining --which is asking for pity in an annoying way -- is more logical than trying to help people with their needs .. which does not make sense. My opponent points briefly to gay marriage, abortions, gun rights, and capital punishment. Interesting ... before I get on to these issues, I want to very briefly remind you how to test if a piece of evidence is legit. It requires two things to be satisfied; 1) expert opinion, and 2) general agreement in the field. This is not always the case (for instance Meta-analysis may show otherwise) but for the sake of argument for today we will say it must meet these two issues. Gay marriage, abortions, and capital punishments have liberals in the upper-hand position; psychologists, criminologists, and biologists generally agree with the liberal platform ... that is, pro gay-marriage, pro-choice, and denounce CP. Practically every single psychological organization argue in support of gay marriage (see video), most criminologists agree that CP does not work (http://www.amnestyusa.org...) and finally, that abortions has resulted in much safer procedures as a result (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...) http://www.youtube.com...In fact my opponent complains that liberals limit choices ... this does not make any sense. How is being gay a choice? And even if it was, is not allowing them to get married somehow enabling them to have a choice? That cannot be if gay marriage is illegal, they simply would not have that available to them. Even if this logic did follow, my opponent would be pro gay marriage, because legalizing same sex marriage would enable gays to have choices. Same thing with abortions; which allows women to have a choice to give birth or not, and finally, if anything limits the choice of someone, CP is certainly it. A judge determines if he will kill you or not.. how is this a choice?Finally, gun debates; while there is a lack of consensus on this issue, the best researched papers normally conclude some kind of gun regulation works, and that those contesting their effectiveness are constructed to show nothing anyways. Australia is a great case of gun control working, same as Canada, Britain, Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc... http://www.politifact.com...If anyone's showing emotion here .. it's my opponent, being emotional about how much she hates liberals. Unlike our side (the liberals) Clinton said it best: "Nobodies right all the time, and even a broken watch is right twice a day!" My Opponent Has Proved NothingFinal Thought Experiment: if my opponents claims were true, it would mean in academia that the general body of academics would lean conservative. This is because in academia, appeals to emotion or fear are not allowed. However ... Most professors actually vote liberal, because our side is far less ideological, and in line with objective facts. This is because most conservatives do not pursue more education but rather go to the private sector for future careers, translating into a more intelligent party, and one in line with more objective facts in most fields as shown here: http://rationalwiki.org... and here: http://www.thestar.com...I hereby ask the audience to consider giving me S&G points, as my opponent made several mistakes, to the point of being difficult to read at times, and sources, as my opponent uses none. Thank you. I shall send this back over to my opponent.