azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

Progressive taxation is not theftAny form of taxation is theft.don’t contribute to economic prosperity as much as the middle class doesWho the hell have you been reading? Keynes? Without the wealthy there would be no middle class jobs.and all the while are able to enjoy a much higher standard and quality of living.If they've never contributed then how did they manage to make money in a market economy in which he who serves best earns best (oversimplification, I'll agree, but nevertheless true quite often)? "uber-sensitive"That's not what I wrote.using this phrase as a criticism of something that conflicts with your idea of propriety doesn’t invalidate the truth that what you said is racist.Truth is subjective.You appear to be engaging in cognitive dissonance.Not in the least.You should learn more about modern racism because what you said was well within the scope of this definitionWhose definition? That of the far-left who think that it is racist not to put the nigger ahead of the cracker (to put it most bluntly)? As a philologist I take very strong objection to the politicization of words.Government spending cant reflect taxes insofar as we demand something to be provided for by our governmentWho is this 'we' about whom you speak?I agree that it should not be in excess, that it should be as small as is prudentYet that which can be thought of as prudent is open to vastly different opinion.but I also don’t want a dumb president that will do something out of idealism which may have a bigger costs in terms of the overall consequences.My sentiments exactly, but about Obama.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

He doesn't know a thing about it.And that is your opinion.You're talking about him, right?Indeed I am.Doesn't fully support them.Ha! Has neither openly supported or come out against MARRIAGE rights, but has repealed DADT. Are you actually going to argue that republicans are MORE for gay rights than democrats?! I'd like to see this...He wants to tax them too greatly.Ahh. Let's look at his record, shall we?-1) His stimulus cut taxes for 95% of Americans.2) He extended the Bush Tax Cuts.3) His Jobs plan (American Jobs Act) was over 50% tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses.4) He has cut taxes for small businesses on 16 occasions.-That's a hell of a tax record.WarWarWarWarWar!!!You appear so intelligent in your other comments. Why are you know ignoring the facts and yelling party-line, unfounded rhetoric?-Again. Let's look at those pesky little facts.0) Received the Nobel Peace Prize. Now this isn't actually evidence, but it is quite telling.1) Troop Projections in Iraq/Afghanistan for Summer 2012: 68,000When he took office: 173,900.THAT IS A 61% REDUCTION!!!2) Ended War in Iraq. Self-Explanotry.3) Engagement in Libya. Tactical air support and missiles without a single combat troop on the ground. Not one. You mean the terrorism of the American people via TSAYes. Because it is the TSA that flies planes into buildings. Ya...extreme surveillanceDo you mean the racial profiling that will occur with republican immigration laws?NDAAI will somewhat concede this. But this can't legally occur during his presidency (see signing statement).-But if you care to look at those facts again. Osama Bin Laden and 21 other Al Queda heads (out of 30) killed under Obama. Under Bush? From what I have researched, I found 4.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

Yup those are the issues in this election. The question was should Obama be re-elected. What is he doing differently than others in those issues?
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: yes

The question was should Obama be re-elected.I know. I wrote the question.-I'm not going to type out my entire argument for each one.Pick one you disagree with, and I will give you my evidence.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

You were clearly writing them out as arguments on their own. Writing them in this fashion:Why?Economy.Immigration.Gay Rights.Middle Class taxes.Energy Independence.Foreign Policy.Terrorism.That's about it. Feel free to attack any of 'em. ...that's whyYou also tagged your ARGUMENT as yes. Merely writing the word doesn't count.Anyways. I would like to hear your opinion on how Obama is going to change the economy for the better. Thanks!
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: yes

I couldn't care less about what he says he will do or what will happen. Here's is his economic record:-JobsThe month he took office, we lost 750,000 jobs. We have now had 6 consecutive months of job growth greater than 100,000. That is on top of more than 22 consecutive months of job growth.3,000,000 jobs have been created in his presidency with improved economic outlooks.Unemployment (U3 and U6 proportionally) are down 1.3% in the past 13 months alone.MarketsThe DJI is up 6,000 points (90%).The S&P500 is up over 600 points (91%).The Nasdaq is up 1500 points (115%).Since they bottomed out in march.Corporate ProfitsAmerican corporation are as profitable as they have ever been. They collectively have more free capital than ever (although this may become a problem later). GDP is at its highest levels in history.Auto-BailoutsFrom the brinks of bankruptcy, GM is now the largest auto-maker in the world after Obama's auto-bailout. The American car industry has bounced back and is one of the strongest sectors.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

I agree with those statistics but I don't think we can attribute all of this growth to Obama. I will admit I was quick to say a failing car company is going to fail whether or not we spend billions on them. I was proved wrong. It worked. Obama is clearly against a free market. In my opinion he has great ideas but they are too far fetched. Although he wants to, we can't help everyone! Here is Obama's view Tuesday, President Barack Obama argued that while a limited government that preserves free markets "speaks to our rugged individualism" as Americans, such a system "doesn't work" and "has never worked" and that Americans must look to a more activist government that taxes more, spends more and regulates more if they want to preserve the middle class. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-limited-govt-preserves-free-markets-doesnt-work-it-has-never-worked  Also, and this is not an attack on Obama's stimulus package ( I am here to learn), what jobs did Obama create that wouldn't have been created on their own. I've heard people say governmental jobs, but how many street sweepers can you really hire. I've also heard GM created tons of jobs, but I can't see that being too true.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

I don't think we can attribute all of this growth to Obama.Certainly not. But the record in undeniable. Under Obama, the economy grows. It also shows republican drones have a very weak argument against him.Tuesday, President Barack Obama argued that while a limited government that preserves free markets "speaks to our rugged individualism" as Americans, such a system "doesn't work" and "has never worked" and that Americans must look to a more activist government that taxes more, spends more and regulates more if they want to preserve the middle class.Wow. Did you even watch the clip?!?! He was talking about trifle-down economics, and I agree with him 110%. It doesn't work. It has never worked. And also CNS News? What is that? Try a reputable news source next time or you will get crap like this.I've heard people say governmental jobs, but how many street sweepers can you really hire.Then you have been lied to. There are FEWER government workers now than when Obama took office.I've also heard GM created tons of jobs, but I can't see that being too true.They were literally on the brinks of bankruptcy. They had leveraged too much and had virtually no capital to fund their activities. After the Obama auto-bailouts, they are now the #1 car manufacturer in the world. The American auto-industry is now one of the strongest sectors of our economy, and of any economy. Time had an entire issue dedicated to the amazing post-bailout comeback of the auto-industry.I can't see that being too true.I can't help willful ignorance.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

First off. I am sorry that this website is all you have going for you, but I'm sure treating people like crap on here really helps you get through the day. Your response to me stating I am here to learn is this.I can't help willful ignorance.I was clearly saying I did not quite understand and was looking for a clarification you prick. Yes he did speak of trifle-down economics but in a more general scope he was talking about how a free market doesn't work. Oh and by the way, are you saying that the quote was not 0 accurate? If not, how in the world is that crap from a bad source.I am sure you are a very intelligent person and I am sure you are so much more educated on this issue than I, but in the scope of things, you seem pretty miserable so I am fine with where I'm at in life!Can anyone please explain what other jobs have been created by Obama because as I was saying earlier I cannot see GM being the only factor. Also, I don't mean to be willfully ignorant. I may be ignorant on this subject but that's why I'm here, to learn.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

was looking for a clarificationwhich I have given. Jobs numbers. Unemployment. Even specific examples of empirical evidence. in a more general scope he was talking about how a free market doesn't work.Well, a purist free market doesn't work. But that's not what he was talking about regardless.how in the world is that crap from a bad source.I was referring to the article. It claimed he was anti-freedom, anti-limits on government. The title was misleading. There were convenient breaks in the quotes so they could be patched together in a way he didn't intend them to be said. But the vieo itself shows he was talking about no such thing.I am sure you are a very intelligent personnot really. I'm sure treating people like crap on here really helps you get through the day.Who did I do that to? The authors of that article...maybe. But if you are referring to the previous comment, then I was simply agitated that you would cite "evidence" without having even looked at it yourself.Can anyone please explain what other jobs have been created by ObamaBy Obama? None, really. Besides the stimulus packages and the staff he brought with him to DC. Creating jobs is not the role of a president directly. Their job is to create an environment suitable for SUSTAINED job growth. None of this roller coaster volatility we have seen in the past 3 decades.you seem pretty miserable nope. Also, I don't mean to be willfully ignorant.I realize that, and I apologize if it did not come across that way. The evidence is readily available. And you have tagged your arguments as "NO" so there must be a reason why. I have posted the key figures in a previous comment to you. What else are you looking for exactly? Housing prices is an area (the only major one really) that has not improved. But I wouldn't expect any significant improvement considering it was built on a bubble. In fact I would be wary if they did begin to grow significantly soon. I am here to learn as well. If you have a counter-argument to my points, feel free to post them (please no more of that CSN news stuff ;) ).
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: yes

For one he doesn't support regressive taxation or flat taxes. Jobs are not created by the wealthy, but by the entire market.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: yes

Totally, People need to start thinking in terms of - maximal aggrigate demand. I feel like most right wing economic ideas do not promote maximal aggregate demand and thus I question the right wing economic ideas with respect to their intelligence and justifiability with respect to economic evidence and modern economic theory. progressive taxation inspires greater consumption from the group that consumes the greatest - The Middle Class. It is the best way to accelerate economic activity. As far as i am aware, Supply side economics (i.e. trickle down economics - right wing economics) is contrary to maximal aggrigate demand because it doesnt promote consumption. Aggregate Demand is the combination of Consumptions, Investment, Govt. Spending, and Net Trade activity. As far as i know, the wealthy invest and consume at a relatively static level as a group. The middle class invest and consume relative to their ability. Progressive taxation increases this ability for the middle class and thus, in order to maximize aggregate demand we need to policies that promote the middle class (typically left wing, socialistic policies). To me it comes down to patriotism, a patriot wants the whole country to do well. I question the patriotism of the right wing because their policies tend to undermine total economic wellbeing which is fundamental to maximal economic prosperity
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: yes

At the very least, who would be a better choice?I expected him to be something better in 2008, and he's been disappointing in a few areas, but I'd rather see moderate Obama over any of the Republicans.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Lebensgefahr

At the very least, who would be a better choice?This candidate about whom you may not have heard, for he's rather hush hush: Ron PaulI'd rather see moderate Obama over any of the Republicans.Now that's just plain old elitism. Romney and Gingrich are little different in many of their policies than Obama, but Ron Paul is nothing like them - so different that I'm reluctant to refer to him by the same label.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: yes

This candidate about whom you may not have heard, for he's rather hush hush: Ron PaulI've heard a lot about Ron Paul actually. I respect many of his policies and views, but I feel that he does go too far at some points. For example, I've heard of his wishes to leave the UN, his economic views are risky at least, and he would simply bring civil unrest to the country, with the amount of change he would bring. I like him, I can easily imagine him as a strong Vice President, able to speak with a strong voice about issues which should be talked about but aren't, but not as a head of state.I understand his support, he's something new and refreshing to politics, and he would eliminate many problems, but that doesn't mean he's the best choice overall.Now that's just plain old elitism.I'm sorry if you took it that way, but it wasn't how I meant it. I don't support Obama perpetually, I simply meant that I see him as the right choice from the available candidates, especially if you look at recent developments in the Republican candidacy, they're ripping each other apart. I would be prepared to support a Republican, if they were a better choice.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

"his economic views are risky at least"Risks need to be taken in these economically turbulent times."he would simply bring civil unrest to the country"Simply? How do you know that? It seems likley (to me at least) he'd be more a unifying force, I'd say there are almost as many Democrats willing to vote for him as there are republicans."with the amount of change he would bring"Ya, cause nobody wants change."he's something new and refreshing to politics,"There's actually nothing new about most of his policies."but that doesn't mean he's the best choice overall."Well, he's the best chioce for the rest of the world, that's for dam sure.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

Risks need to be taken in these economically turbulent times.To put it better, I do not agree with his economic views, I think they would be bad for the global economy.Simply? How do you know that? It seems likley (to me at least) he'd be more a unifying force, I'd say there are almost as many Democrats willing to vote for him as there are republicans.But people aren't simply defined as Republicans or Democrats. His progressive policies would anger a large number of the huge conservative population in the US. I would be surprised if there was no a reaction should all of his policies be passed.Ya, cause nobody wants change.Change for the sake of change though, is that always a good thing? And again, conservatives, they don't.There's actually nothing new about most of his policies.There's something new with his ideas being given the voice that he gives them, such strong Libertarian views in mass media, taken seriously. I didn't say he was new in himself, simply what he's doing it new.Well, he's the best chioce for the rest of the world, that's for dam sure.I'd agree to that. Obama's doing well enough, I think, but any of the other Republicans would be very bad for the international community as a whole. Paul, I think, would be good.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: yes

Socialism is essentially the principle of amelioration applied to social and political discourse. This doesnt mean pure equitability which characterizes communism, rather, it means to promote a balance between the tendency for stratafication and the ideal of providing for base level provisions - food, shelter, clothing, health. Evidence suggests that socialism tends to reduce crime. Socialist policies promote education as well, which can only serve to benefit our economic situation insofar as our nation has become a service-based economy, and our remaining industries are both capital intensive and require at least some post secondary degrees (High tech industries). Insofar as this is true, Obama, who has an idiologically left (socialistic) alignment, is the best option. His efficacy at promoting socialist policies is limited by the right aligned political majority in congress, however, if he were able to promote his ideas our country would benefit over the long run more than it would otherwise.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

Why is this argument so based on what a republican did 8 years ago or what a democrat did 12 years ago. Yes, we can look which party is to blame for which problem but it doesn't help much when looking forward. You can't simply state that whoever was in office at the time an issue arose that it was their fault. Things take time to pan out.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

i would vote no but, anyways., look obama might not have screwed anything up but. like all american presidents he did noting but screwed the country more. china could kill the united states because no president focus on there metal problem of 90 trill in debt
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

He's a people president, he actually cares about American citizens.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

he actually cares about American citizens.I would really like to know why you think this.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

I think this is be answered in the simplest of fashions. He will be re-elected but it is the reason for that bothers me. It is not about what he has done or not done. In 2012, it is about how the Republican Party has acted so poorly over the last year most recently and continually with the budget then add in the total lack of viable Republican candidates. Ron Paul is about the only one who has enough to say that it is worth listening to. (whether you agree or not). I am a liberal Republican and looking at this election, the Republican party might as well place a loaded trash bag in a suit and call it a candidate. Sad but true.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

YES! He has done sooo much to help the world! He has gotten troops out of countries AND is down to earth with people. The stuff he doesn't get down is because of others limitations
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

He has done sooo much to help the world!His job isn't to help the world, it's to help his people: Americans, and taking them to war ain't gonna help.He has gotten troops out of countriesBush got them out. What Obama did was sent them to different countries.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

Compared to everyone else, yes.__________________________
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

Obama is simply the only valid choice between him and the four other Republican candidates. The current front runner for the Republican party (Romney) has changed his mind so many time on such an extreme level, that he cannot be trusted. Even Ron Paul is completely crazy. He wants to get rid of civil rights laws that make segregation illegal. He is entirely for states rights to control just about everything. He wants to get rid of Federal Highways. Newt Gingrich is a complete ass who seems to like corporations than the middle class. Santorum is a Homophobic racist who pretended that he didn't say that the US should support black people, despite video evidence of him saying it. Obama is the only candidate that can be trusted to not screw the country over. I agree that his economic reform plan was not very affective, but until I hear the other four candidates suggest something that could even remotely work better than Obama, I'm going to have to stick with him.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: Yes

yes, Obama should be re -elected. He has really tried to get the economy back on it's feet and really seems to care about the middle class, bringing jobs back to America, and ending the war. Obama gave a speech this past summer on the war and he mentioned that the war has been costing our country about $10 billion per year and I was floored by that because I think that the money can be used towards better things such as helping students pay off loans, providing jobs for Americans, putting food in people's mouths, helping people get their homes back, etc.  I also can't believe that although so many people voted Obama into office, that so many people such as in the house of representatives and/or senate have vetoed his economic proposals which were clearly created to help "the little guys" like me -poor college educated people. That just don't make sense to me, it looks like they're trying to prove a negative point such as a black guy couldn't cut it as president. While I'm not totally racist there are some people in the house of representatives, senate, and/or running for election. And not everyone who is racist is a member of the KKK, nazi, or skinhead - some of them may smile at your face and speak nice to your face but kick you in the teeth personally or professionally behind your back. And these people running for president, all I hear is "blah, blah, blah" but no one cares about the "real issues" facing American such as: health care for low income people, jobs coming back to America, creating jobs for teachers, bringing discipline back in the classrooms, etc.
Debate: Should Obama be Re-Elected?
Side: No

He has really tried to get the economy back on it's feetTRIED?! It IS back on its feet and sprinting. Don't downplay his achievements ;).$10 billion per yearUhh... That is PER MONTH!helping students pay off loansObama's already got that covered. He passed student loan reform and is urging congress to extend low interest rates for student loans.providing jobs for AmericansWe are so close to being were we were when he took office. The past year has been incredible for the economy.Please vote for him even if I can't! Our economy won't survive another republican "Trickle-down economics" president.