Whitaker,+Mya

Mya Whitaker Regional Coordinator Bay Area Urban Debate League 1 year high school debate experience 1 year college debate experience

I prefer to see clash in the rebuttal speeches. Compare your arguments to your opponents arguments. I do not like speed reading - I can't keep up & it harms the clash of the debate. I do not care for abstract philosophical arguments (Zizek, Lacan, Foucault, Butler, etc). I would prefer you get to the heart of the debate - why is the affirmative good or bad for the world? This is the core of the content of the round.

*Kritik - I do have a soft spot for arguments about women, racism, and poverty. Not arguments draped in difficult philosophy, but arguments that speak to the lived realities of people who are marginalized. *Topicality - it's not my favorite. In the right context, it could work, but you probably aren't going to win here. It's on you to be prepared. Try to clash - I will vote analytical arguments. *Framework - I can be persuaded that marginalized people need access to government policy, protections, and process. But I do think you think you have to affirm a plan just because that's what "policy debate is" or the resolution says so.
 * Politics - it's a non-starter for me. You have to have a better argument available.

At the end of the debate, I am going to be frank with my feedback. Congratulations on getting to Nationals! All of your leagues are proud of you.