John Adams should replace Jefferson on the nickel.

======== REBUTTALS ======== "He defended the soldiers at the Boston Massacre..." --- Once again, my opponent is bringing up a normal contention. John Adams was a lawyer and won a trial... so what? "Appointed John Marshal to the supreme court..." --- There were many influential Supreme Court Justices. Just because John Adams appointed an influential justice, does not make Adams special. "Seeing as you think slavery was wrong then how do you explain that Jefferson owned over 200, while John Adams owned none?" --- Jefferson was simply comforming to social norms of the South. You will be hard pressed to find any rich man in the South who didn't own slaves. George Washington also owned slaves , but should Washington have his face taken off the dollar bill for that? No. "To continue to show how ridiculous my opponents debating strategy is, I will use the same technique. 'Jefferson's preamble to the Declaration.....' So he put 7 words together? I can do that too! See: 'I am embarrassing you right now, yeah!' Does that mean I deserve to be on the nickel?" >I am under the impression that your 7 words didn't become an enduring statement of human rights, so my logic doesn't apply here. "So he bought some land? So do 150 million other Americans. Do they deserve to be on the nickel?" >No. Because the Louisiana Purchase more than doubled the land size of this country at a minimal price. "Being the first VP contains much more significance then being the 46th does. It set's up a precedent of what the whole of the job is." >*Awaits ways in which Adams set the precedent.* Unclaimed contention. Contention dropped. "This does not refute my contention of Jefferson bring hypocritical..." --- The Louisiana Purchase has led to massive revenue and profits, incomparable to the amount spent. "Well he didn't write those exact lines." >Yes he did... See your quoted "original line". The last part is "...life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness." "Father of our 6th president..." --- My opponenet concede this point. He has demonstrated there is no difference between John Adams Sr. and George Bush Sr. ====================== REBUTTAL - PRO'S CONCLUSION ====================== "Just because Jefferson was more influential doesn't mean he should be on the nickel." >Take note- My opponent concedes that Jefferson was more influential than John Adams. "You have not proved how much it would cost to put Adams on the Nickel. The profit derived from seigniorage I agree would be nominal, but it would cancel out the cost of changing the face. Why wouldn't these costs be nominal as well?" >I have already rebutted this. Seignorage applies to collector coins. We are talking about normal nickels. This point is void. ========= CONCLUSION ========= >My opponent conceded the following contentions: 1, 2, 3, and 4. >I have successfully defended my opponent's rebuttals of my contentions 5 and 6. >Thus, all my contentions stand. >I have proved that John Adams successes were not unique, he was just a player in American History who had a much lesser impact than Jefferson, which my opponent conceded. >I have proved that the cost of changing the nickel would be foolish in a recession. It is just a waste of money. >The resolution has been more than adequately negated. ====== SOURCE ====== [1] http://www.mountvernon.org...