Bizarro

[TheDrake]

Thought I'd try something new. Debate teams regularly have to argue a position regardless if they believe in it or not. This thread challenges everyone to debate the opposite of what you believe in. I'll lead mine with:

It is about time that we have a leader who will protect American jobs by putting high tariffs on imports. Unfair trade is killing America's ability to compete in the global market.

Obamacare is unconstitutional and needs to be erased. We were much better off before it existed.

Climate change is an unproven hoax and needs careful examination for the manipulation of winners and losers.

[D.W.]

I'm having trouble thinking of a topic where I can say I refute every aspect of the opposition opinion.  Anything I could try, that is a true polar opposite of my beliefs, would probably just come off as snark, and more importantly is typically only one facet of opposition to my beliefs on that topic. 

[TheDrake]

Good for you, DW. I was wondering if someone might post a caricature of opposition beliefs. I also think that you don't have to have a full opposite. Next time you see a thread where you start an argument, pop in here and take the opposite side.

[Pete at Home]

To answer the Trump challenge and to reclaim all those voters who are, as Huffington Post teaches us, full supporters of sexual assault, the Democratic Party must look to its own celebrities who demand the privilege of sexually assaulting young vulnerable talent.  Madonna 2020! 

Slogan: "I'm Madonna, bitch"

How's Trump going to respond to that in debate?

Keep racing to the bottom. It's been the American way since we accidentally won the cold war and lost our sense of purpose.

[TheDeamon]

Would be an unfair fight, particularly if Madonna pairs up with another female diva. All they'd have to do is prance around (nearly) naked with vague promises to continue to do so, and they'd get the vote of a lot of "those brain dead men" who voted for Trump this last time around. After all, in a race to the bottom, you're going to have a hard time trying to get lower than that.

[Gaoics79]

Would be an unfair fight, particularly if Madonna pairs up with another female diva. All they'd have to do is prance around (nearly) naked with vague promises to continue to do so, and they'd get the vote of a lot of "those brain dead men" who voted for Trump this last time around. After all, in a race to the bottom, you're going to have a hard time trying to get lower than that.

Lol. What is Madonna going to be, 60 by 2020? To each his own man

[TheDeamon]

Would be an unfair fight, particularly if Madonna pairs up with another female diva. All they'd have to do is prance around (nearly) naked with vague promises to continue to do so, and they'd get the vote of a lot of "those brain dead men" who voted for Trump this last time around. After all, in a race to the bottom, you're going to have a hard time trying to get lower than that.

Lol. What is Madonna going to be, 60 by 2020? To each his own man

She'll be 62 in 2020, but she also works in an industry where looks are everything, and she seems to have already sunk an small fortune into looking younger than she actually is. She doesn't look that old, at least, on the parts we can see. Of course, she's probably a health/fitness nut taken to something of an extreme, so that's probably helped slow it down a fair bit too. Which doesn't get into the magic that a good makeup artist can work, even if most of what's being seen is prosthetic.

[Greg Davidson]

Greg's bizzaro defense of the following:

It is about time that we have a leader who will protect American jobs by putting high tariffs on imports. Unfair trade is killing America's ability to compete in the global market.

If economic theory is correct, high tariffs would reduce overall growth in the world economy and they would increase the costs of goods to Americans. On the positive side, high tariffs should reduce the competition against American sources of manufacture, which should directly benefit American workers. 

The potential benefits are 100% concentrated among American workers; the potential costs are not 100% concentrated on American workers (we only suffer a fraction of the pain from lower world growth; there are substitution and innovation options to address the problems of higher prices).

Furthermore, there is probably opportunity to bluff or pressure some countries in giving trading terms that favor us - in a way, this could be monetizing some of the public goods that the US provides via our military and cultural strengths.