Blumenthal,+Jordan

Jordan Blumenthal St. Mark’s '08 Northwestern University '12

I will listen to any argument you make. Don't expect me to understand or apply the necessary context to certain words or catch phrases that you might use. Aff/Neg’s have to warrant/impact the arguments for me to vote on them. I will try to be fair in evaluating whatever you run. Impact calculus is important. So do a lot of it. I think turns the case arguments can be make or break.


 * An arg is an arg is an arg is an arg. If it has a claim+impact+warrant then I'll vote on it.

Tell me why your interpretation is better for debate. Do comparative impact calculus. Does the impact to the limits DA outweigh the affs education and ground DA's to your interpretation. What impacts are most important (what framework should the judge utilize when evaluating T impacts).

The more specific the links to your K the happier I'll be. I think perms should tend towards utilizing the language of the alternative text and away from the generic "do both" or "plan and every other instance" language. I find a lot of my decisions usually revolve around a framework issue.

I'm a pretty good judge for you if there is a close connection between your argument and the resolution. Especially if your argument is in the direction of the topic. That said, I do enjoy/appreciate a good 2NR on framework.

I'm definitely in the "neg conditionality has gotten out of control" camp--1cp 1k probably kinda ok, 1 CP that does the aff, 1 k with an alt that could do the aff and a word PIC definitely absolutely not legit (affs need to learn how to go for theory--don't go for theory if you're not good at it). Normal means/consult/any other cheating counterplans are definitely bad. But as I said above, it’s a debate to be had. Make sure your theory arguments are developed and impacted if you go for it.

Speed/Clarity/etc—My rule for clarity and speed is “if I can’t understand you, I hate you.”--also I reserve the right to employ the Mahoney .5 point reduction system if there are excessive clarity issues. I’ll read evidence if I feel it is necessary to make a decision. Being aggressive in cross-x is sweet. Making fun of people and making jokes is sweet. Being mean just to be mean is usually not good. Being mean to your partner is even less good. Basically if you can pull it off, be as aggressive and mean and funny as possible.

If you have any questions feel free to ask. Email: jblumie@gmail.com