Real Democrats are superior to Occupy Democrats

The Conclusion of Pro Perhaps the most hilarious part of Pro’s narrow-minded and fallacious portrayal of Occupy Democrats and “Real Democrats” is their closing statement that the only reason that Occupy Democrats are inferior to Real Democrats is that they state nonfactual things (“unfactual is not a word in the English dictionary). There are three issue with this conclusion. The first is that if this is the only reason that the resolution is true, then the degree of ‘superiority’ is really so small that it could be considered negligible and thus on that alone it can be concluded that they are relatively equal to each other. The second is that if I can successfully prove that “Real Democrats” also say completely nonfactual things, Pro’s entire case is immediately destroyed. The third is that if I can prove the Denmark point wrong in some way, Pro’s case is immediately destroyed. In other words, Pro’s case is so easy to destroy that they have already lost this debate before I even begin to run my counter-case. Things that “Real Democrats” say that are nonfactual: The Statue of Liberty means everything. We take it for granted today. We take it for granted. Remember the Statue of Liberty stands for what America is. We as Democrats have to remind ourselves and remind the country the great principles we stand for. This is a place of protection. This is not a country of bullies. We are not an empire. We are the light. We are the Statue of Liberty. JERRY SPRINGER, This American Life, Jan. 30, 2004 Barack Obama: “You might not be ready for diplomacy with Beijing if you can’t visit the Olympics without insulting our closest ally.” – September, 2012 “Pakistan is a peace-loving, democratic country.” -Malala Yousafzai “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Mahatma Gandhi I won’t bother explaining why these are nonfactual unless Pro tries to deny it and also would like to say that there were millions more I could have quoted but for the sake of being concise chose not to. All those I quoted support the ideal of democracy and are not members of the Occupy Movement. The Racism Issue Let’s say that Denmark were the most openly racist nation on Earth. Pro said they were only one of the most openly racist but let’s say they actually were number one at it. Would this be relevant to proving that they were not the happiest nation on Earth? Has Pro provided one shred of evidence linking being openly racist and being unhappy? The fact that Pro raised that not only proves how little there is against the point but also proves how illogical the entire resolution and Pro’s brain itself are. This is not an insult or ad hominem way of winning but simply an objective analysis of Pro and his/her debate. Evidence relating to Denmark’s national Happiness Rating UN Happiness Ranking 2015: 3rd http://unsdsn.org... UN Happiness Ranking 2013: 1st http://unsdsn.org... The only one being nonfactual prior to 2015 and after the 2013 report would have been anyone denying this. I have proven three things in this debate: Non-Occupy, “Real”, Democrats state nonfactual things. Denmark being racist is irrelevant to the validity of their national happiness ranking/rating. Pro’s entire case is not only false but utterly irrelevant to both other points within itself and the resolution overall.