azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

I addressed your claim that he was telling you how to vote multiple times, and not once did you respond to my explanation of it. That seems rather hypocritical, considering how you just accused me of not reading your comment. If I responded to that claim of yours, how can you claim I did not read it?Again, he was telling you that your reasons for voting for Hillary were not good opinions. That is not telling you how to vote, and it is not telling you that voting for a liberal is a good idea. It also isn't forcing his opinions on you, like you have claimed.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

so you admit you don't actually read comments.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

1) He very clearly did read your comment, as he addressed every point you made, something you have (consistantly) failed to do.2) I never told you how to vote. I never said that you voting for a liberal is not a good idea. This is a perfect example of you appearing to not read what we people are saying to you. My exact words were: "you should support someone for more than just the fact that they share some of your beliefs." That means that you should not vote for someone just because they are a liberal. You should vote for them because they are a liberal and you think they would make a good president. I predict your response: "Fact: I read your entire post. ." If you truly read the entire thing, then respond to everything I said. Because otherwise I have no reason to believe you.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

they do not have the right to force them on others.Then it's a good thing I wasn't doing so.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

So you admit that I have the rightr to vote however I want?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Never denied it in the first place, yeah. At the same time, I have the right to stick my hand into a pool drain; doesn't mean I should.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Thank you. .
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Just because it's your right do do that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. And of course you should vote for someone who shares your beliefs. But by your logic, there is no way to choose Hillary from all the other liberal candidates.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

You don't get to tell me how to vote. I have the right to vote however I want. It is my personal business, not yours.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

I already addressed this point. (This is why we think you don't read what we say. Or least, why we accuse you of not responding to what we say, which is how a debate should work.)I'm not telling you how to vote. All I was saying was that picking a good president isn't just picking the beliefs you agree with. Other factors, like how good or inept a president they would be, are important. If you don't want anyone telling you how to vote, stay out of politics. Just because you have the right to do something doesn't mean what you are doing is correct. Also, if you want to keep things your personal business, don't post about things that are your "personal business" to a debate site.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

And of course you should vote for someone who shares your beliefs.Read the comments you are responding to. Seriously.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Nobody is questioning your right, they are questioning your logic.What logic are you using to support Hillary over other Democratic candidates?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Why do you keep bringing up non existent candidates? If Dana is forced to choose between a liberal or conservative she will pick a liberal. Since the only candidates right now are the liberal Hillary and conservatives her logic is fine.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Bernie Sanders is also a candidate, and he is further to the left than Clinton.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Bernie Sanders is so far off the radar that even with you telling me that he is a candidate it took me an hour to find when he actually made the announcement. This debate makes no mention of other liberal candidates, so it isn't really fair to hold that against her.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Yeah, that's fine. I was merely pointing out that someone's beliefs is not the only factor that goes into whether or not you should support someone. Wasn't meant to be a major attack, was just pointing out that it was an oversimplification.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Yeah, that's fine. I was merely pointing out that someone's beliefs is not the only factor that goes into whether or not you should support someone.I already pointed out in another argument that you didn't respond to that what the candidate believes is all that is ever used.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

some of your beliefs too? "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."  "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity." "(We) .....can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people." "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own ... in order to create this common ground." "I certainly think the free-market has failed." "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Absolutely not. Hillary has already promised to increase the federal government's giveaway programs by giving free community collage tuition everyone. She is committed to actions that will continue to put us further into debt. She has a history of repeated lying to cover her mistakes and her power hungry schemes. Liberal ideology is at the core of her political beliefs. As such she is not the leader we need.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

There is zero difference between the Ds and Rs. The cabal that controls America already knows who their next president is. The vote thang is only a tool they use to keep the flocks of dreeple mutant American people docile and pacified and distracted.Why do over 300 million people allow just a few hundred to enslave them and steal from them?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

i ask this all the time. how any american can even think about this old bag running for prez.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

its the programming. the dreeple can't be bothered thinking for themselves. voting doesn't work,voting does nothing but keep an illusion of participation in the selection process. no one seems to note or care that once the scum get into office they do waht they choose and ignore the will of the people.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

I don't think socialism is right for America. Or anyone. So no.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

She isn't a socialist, so how is that relevant?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Do you know what socialism is? If you did, then you'd know that a lot of liberals, including Hillary, are in fact socialists.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=socialism http://econlib.org/library/Enc/Socialism.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SocialismYes, I know what socialism is. You, however, do not. Neither Hillary, nor any liberal (hint: if they are liberal then they are not socialist) believe in the key aspects of socialism.Take your rhetoric elsewhere.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Liberal and socialist are just labels, she may call herself a liberal, but shares many ideas with socialism, maybe not all, but many. She can implement socialist ideas and still call herself a liberal.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Liberal and socialist are just labelsNo, they are ideologies, and they are mutually exclusive.she may call herself a liberal, but shares many ideas with socialismThen list which ones specifically. She can implement socialist ideas and still call herself a liberal.If she believes in socialist ideas, she isn't a liberal. Regardless, you haven't yet provided evidence, you have just made claims. List which ideas specific to socialism that she believes in.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Because she says or is labelled as a liberal doesn't make her one. It's what her ideology is, not what she or others label her as. I only have a whole arsenal of socialist quotes by Hillary Clinton, but here are only a few."We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity." "(We) ... can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/ marxist.asp You should research quotes before you start throwing them around.""Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."Strike one."It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a "we're all in it together" society.Now, there is no greater force for economic growth than free markets, but markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed."Strike two."We can set the vision. We can even work to articulate the goal. But the pathway is extraordinarily complicated because of how we live today and how we think of ourselves in relation to our fellow citizens.Take health care. I think we could get almost unanimous agreement that having more than 45 million uninsured people, nine million of whom are children, is a moral wrong in America. And I think we could reach that agreement, and then we would have to start doing the hard work of deciding what we were going to do to make sure that they were not uninsured, because an uninsured person who goes to the hospital is more likely to die than an insured person. I mean, that is a fact.So, what do we do? We have to build a political consensus. And that requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf, in order to create this common ground.The same with energy — you know, we can't keep talking about our dependence on foreign oil, and the need to deal with global warming, and the challenge that it poses to our climate and to God's creation, and just let business as usual go on.And that means something has to be taken away from some people."Strike three, yoooooooooou're outta here!Edit: Oh, and if I were you, I wouldn't ever trust the source you got those from again. If you want legitimate, honest information, that is.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Ummmm... you just helped me establish that Hillary supports socialist perspectives. I only took parts of the quotes, but even in the entire context, they still maintain my previous assertion. Don't worry, I did all of the research I could on these, I knew their context ;)
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

....Let's start from the top.Saying "We are going to take away tax cuts for the sake of society" is not socialist in any way, shape, or form.Saying "there is no greater force for economic growth than free markets" is the exact OPPOSITE of socialism.And saying "We need to use taxpayer money for social programs" is not socialist. In fact, it is a concept the originated with Classical Conservatism. In none of those quotes did she espouse any of the fundamental concepts of Socialism.So no, they do not support your assertion at all.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

First of all, doing ANYTHING for the sake of society, that takes from someone is a form of some type of socialism. And taking tax cuts is one of the most basic things a socialist would do, being if it was "for the people".Next, she says she promotes the free market, but she also says it needs to have restrictions and needs to be watched, so that everyone would get an equal chance. That usually takes the form of promoting some people at the expense of handicapping others.And lastly, doing anything at the expense of someone "for the people", like I already said, is socialism.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

First of all, doing ANYTHING for the sake of society, that takes from someone is a form of some type of socialism.That makes absolutely no sense. You have created your own definition of socialism so reduced and vague that it applies to absolutely every single economic system and society in the history of humanity.And taking tax cuts is one of the most basic things a socialist would do, being if it was "for the people".Complete nonsense! Just because someone does something "for the people" does not make it socialist. By that logic, every ideology that believes it is best for society is socialist. That would make every Republican a Socialist as well.Next, she says she promotes the free market, but she also says it needs to have restrictions and needs to be watched, so that everyone would get an equal chance. That usually takes the form of promoting some people at the expense of handicapping others.The fact that she believes the market exists proves that she isn't a socialist, as Socialism is antithetical to capitalism and therefore markets, be they free or regulated.And lastly, doing anything at the expense of someone "for the people", like I already said, is socialism.Again, not it isn't, unless you believe everything is socialism.Do you even have a working definition of socialism that you are basing this on? Or is it more of a "gut feeling" kind of thing?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Obviously, you seem to have no idea what socialism is, as my family comes from socialist countries, I know what it is quite well. But since you know, please enlighten me.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

I have already given you numerous sources defining and outlining socialism, and you have clearly brushed them aside. So I will ask you again: Do you have any definition of socialism that you are basing your comments off of, or no?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Here's a quote from one of your sources"There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[6] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism."I analyze what my opponent says carefully, I don't just blindly spew out my feeelings
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

"There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.Indeed, there are many definitions of different forms of socialism. So, again, which one are you thinking of when you made your previous comments?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Socialism can't be clearly defined, as I've said Hillary has many socialist stances, although maybe not a pure form, but at least some form. I'm not familiar with all of the hundreds of political terms for socialism and its variants, degrees and blends, but I can at least call it where I do see some of it. There is basically no government on earth without at least some degree of socialism. I don't agree with it, I don't think that things should be taken from someone and given to another, but I do believe it's the responsibility of everyone to help each other out.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Socialism can't be clearly defined, as I've said Hillary has many socialist stances,Without a definition that you are referring to, that statement really has no value, as it can mean anyhting. although maybe not a pure form, but at least some form.Yes, in the same way that every politician in this country has some socialist stances in "some form".I'm not familiar with all of the hundreds of political terms for socialism and its variants, degrees and blends, but I can at least call it where I do see some of it. Which, again, means nothing if you do not have a definition that you are basing said observations on. There is basically no government on earth without at least some degree of socialism.Then what value is there in pointing out that Hillary has some "socialist stances" if, in essence, everyone does? I don't think that things should be taken from someone and given to another, but I do believe it's the responsibility of everyone to help each other out.Where do you stand on Social Contract Theory, then?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

When I say can't be clearly defined, I mean it's just a very broad idea, that can be further specified into more ideas, like communism and nazism. And everyone has socialist stances, which aren't good but Hillary has many, and many that are in a purer form that, let's say, a more right-wing person would have.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

that can be further specified into more ideas, like communism and nazism.Communism and Socialism are two different ideologies, and Nazism is a form of Fascism which is an entirely different ideology. which aren't good but Hillary has many, and many that are in a purer form that, let's say, a more right-wing person would have.Again, this means absolutely nothing if you aren't able to provide a definition so as to determine which are "purer" or not.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

No, they don't support your position at all. I hope a second opinion helps you realize this.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Can a liberal, while not believing in the key aspects of socialism, still adopt similar means, worldviews, or goals? If so, what key aspects make the modern liberal ideology mutually exclusive from socialism? If not, which ideology fits best with socialized X?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

A liberal can indeed believe in some ideas that come from socialism, but not the main tenants of socialism itself. For example, if one believes in the public ownership of the means of production, then that person is not liberal.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

What are the main tenants of socialism?What are the main tenants of liberalism?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

She is a has-been and a turncoat. She has the same interest in America as Obama: none, zero.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

That is nonsense. I do not support Obama, nor do I support Hillary, but one does not devote their life to politics and public service if they have no interest in America.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

but one does not devote their life to politics and public service if they have no interest in America.Absolutely. It's called a career. And it's about oneself. Power➝Money➝Power
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Please, look at Obama's history and the amount of time he has devoted to public service, and how little money he has to show for it.Again, I loathe Obama as a politician, I really, really do. But it is ridiculous to let political disagreements lead one to make such ridiculous claims.Now Hillary I'm willing to concede is just a career politician. I am 100% positive she has "interest in America", but she is definitely a career politician.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

Hillary and Obama of course "have an interest" in America. As a source of their income.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Obama's interest in America is centered on dragging down our power in the world. He is an anti-colonialist like his father. He is completely driven by his ideology.-Clinton is not driven by an ideology. She is motivated by simple greed. She wants for herself, to be rich, powerful and respected. Her interests for America are there, but they are secondary.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Obama's interest in America is centered on dragging down our power in the world. He is an anti-colonialist like his father. He is completely driven by his ideology.Then how do you justify all of the actions he makes that have absolutely no impact on our global power?Clinton is not driven by an ideology. She is motivated by simple greed. She wants for herself, to be rich, powerful and respected. Her interests for America are there, but they are secondary.We do not disagree here.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

So instead of responding, you just repeat yourself. Great.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

No I did not. You should read my postings a bit more attentive.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

"Absolutely. It's called a career. And it's about oneself. Power➝Money➝Power"Then I disagree, and you respond with:"Hillary and Obama of course "have an interest" in America. As a source of their income."That is repeating yourself and ignoring the response that was made to you. And before you try to claim some "nuanced" excuse, the desire to make money from one's country is a form of power, which means in your second post, you were indeed saying that their interest in the United States was money and power, just like you did in the former post.Now can you address the response I made to you?
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

So repeating oneself is reserved for you, huh?... but one does not devote their life to politics and public service ...... and the amount of time he has devoted to public service ...Now can you address the response I made to you?I did. And your patronizing discussion style is not constructive. So I'm done with you.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

I repeated a point that you refused to address, where as you repeated a claim that had already been addressed.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

As a centre-right libertarian, I'd rather vote for freaking Bernie Sanders over her.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Out of curiosity, why? Bernie Sanders is (obviously) much further away from you ideologically than Hillary is.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: yes

Mostly because, from what I've seen at least, Sanders doesn't seem to the massively corrupt liar as she is.
Debate: Should Hillary Clinton be elected for president
Side: no

liars will not change unless its for their befit.even so its just a game to get what they want