The GOP Rests on Ideologically Shaky Ground

RebuttalR6) I ask the audience when elaborating CON's "case" to ask themselves one question: What does ANY of CON's argument have to do with the resolution? CON has yet to actually argue this debate, and it is now closing statements.I do not refute CON's history lesson. Rather I wonder what it has to do with the resolution. What does Lincoln's stance on slavery have to do with modern GOP ideology? CON is wasting his time, my time, and the audience's time by stating a laundry list of historical detail that has no direct pertinence to the resolution.R7) CON's paragraph on "limited government" is so convoluted that he confuses himself. He utilizes the terms "conservative" and "Republican" interchangeably:"Conservatives favor policies that maintain the status quo; that is why modern republicans are attracted to a strict constitution." ...only to conclude that "Republicanism and conservatism is not the same thing". I am disappointed that we are not debating the resolution. CON is having trouble with simple sentence structure, to say nothing about forwarding a case. R8) CON continually confuses "rule of law" and "majority rule" in his framework. In America, as in most democratic societies, the rule of law is established via majority rule - majorities in the legislature create laws. Dismiss CON's arguments, as they are strawmen irrelevant to this debate. Both Republicans and Democrats adhere to rule of law via majority rule.R9) Again, I move to dismiss CON's graphics, this time on liberalism. There is no factual basis for his arbitrary delineations. Without any sort of justification or substantiation, they are worthless.To contrast, I have explained how libertarianism is a product of classical liberalism, and how in general, modern conservatism very much closely resembles classical liberalist ideals. Due to our sound-byte culture, I shorten "classical liberalism" to simply "liberalism" and thus conclude that the unifying ideology in America is indeed liberalism.R10) CON's distinction:"The Republican Party favors republicanism, while the Democratic Party favors democracy."...sounds like something a 3rd grader made up. Without his "rule of law" and "majority rule" obfuscations, there's not much left other than 3rd grade reasoning.I have outlined this with some care and detail - the Republican party represents modern conservatives, who favor classical liberal policies like limited government, free markets, and freedoms of speech.The Democratic party represents modern liberals, who also favor classical liberal policies like freedom of speech. However, modern liberals deviate from classical liberalism in that they advocate MORE government, i.e. socialism. ConclusionAll Americans are liberals due to shared beliefs stemming from classical liberalism, which is synonymous with traditional American values like freedom of speech and religion, separation of powers leading to limited government, and a market-based economy. This is the true middle ground in American politics - most of America believes in this general liberal framework, Republican or Democrat. The Statue of Liberty is symbolic of this shared liberal belief.Modern conservatives, i.e. the GOP, hold these liberal beliefs very closely. Modern liberals, i.e. the Democrats, hold them as well, but deviate in that they advocate a socialist approach to governance.The GOP goes too far in denouncing the Democrats. Instead of denouncing only the socialist element of Democratic policy, they denounce the liberalist element as well.By doing so, GOP ideology rests upon shaky ground, and they lose the vote of moderates. Democrats like Hillary Clinton, who champion liberalism while decrying socialism (keep in mind that public health care is bipartisan), thus claim this moderate ground, putting the GOP on the defensive.CON didn't engage with this synopsis in the entire debate, so it stands as it is.Thank you for reading this debate, and I hope it becomes a constructive experience for all involved.