Hurwitz,+Jacob

The only thing worse than conditionality is a loss of hegemony.

Slosser jokes = auto-30

Early Bird philosophy Tl;dr – I like policy and tech o/w truth Debated 4 years at GBS Freshman at Wake

A lot of judges are hesitant to vote on theory. I am not one of them. I don’t care if you go for condo, consult’s a vi, or no neg fiat I won’t hurt your speaks for it, and I’m willing to vote for it. T: go for it. I think reasonability is likely best, but it’s about their interpretation not how reasonable the aff itself is. It’s entirely possible for a clearly topical aff to lose to a terrible T violation if their interp is worse. DAs/CPs/Impact turns and other case strategies: good ideas. Offense/defense is good but there’s sometimes absolute defense. I think the best answer to politics is political capital not key, but don’t feel pressured to go for it. Kritiks: I was very policy in high school and am probably not the best judge for super-intense critical strategies. If you feel the need to extend the K, I will judge it much more technically than it probably deserves, so I’ll check in for the 1ar conceding the floating pik or serial policy failure or whatever k shenanigans you’ve got going on. Barring a major technical mistake, I’m likely very aff biased.