Herndon,+Astead

Homewood-Flossmoor Debate 07'-10' Cleared at some tourneys, overall nice guy
 * Background:** Marquette U 14'- Political Theory/Journalism

1. Debate is as much a persuasive activity as it is a logical one. Confidence, clarity, and cross-x are just as important as your 2NC block. If you have a more important argument, in any speech, emphasis and explanation will go a long way on my ballot. Convicing your opponents that you are right can be just as important as convincing me. Go as fast as u want, but be clear.
 * General:** I have not judged a ton, so i wont pretend to know everything. Ill change my philosophy as i gain more judging experience.

2. Be confident not rude. Not every argument, (no matter your evidence) should be stated. I am not the one for racial, sexist, or discriminatory arguments. On the flip side, if you feel personally offended by what your opponent has said, convince me, and you'll win.

3. As you prolly guessed from #1, Im not one to interpret your cards for you. If you dont point out an argument in the rebuttal, it will not factor into my decision, unless the debate is abnormally bad. The 2A should read every card read in the debate. And it his/her job to point out the fact that your politics IL makes no sense, or that the K ALT is a sham. THey all are. So point it out. Same for the Neg. Contest those meta-impacts, or they'll stand.

4. Lighten up. Smile. Tell a Joke. But only if your funny.


 * Specific Arugments**:


 * T-** If you have proven abuse, or if it is was badly dropped, im all in. But i am sypmathetic to reasonability and no abuse arguments when it comes to small violations. Tell me what you couldnt run, or what the Aff could've claimed. Aff, dont be afraid to go for a "no impact" on T. Meaning that since the neg hasnt proven a loss of ground or PA is a voter, that a weak counter interp should be preferred.


 * Disads/PLTX-** This was my go to 2NR. Out debate someone on a DA, impact it correctly, talk about it in context of the advantages, and you win. READING MORE CARDS DOES NOT MAKE YOU WIN!!! Aff make smart arguments, i am not in the cult of uniqueness. It does not create a link, a no link is a no link. Defense is good. Offense is better. But Defense + Advantages can help u win. Sidenote: PLTX is rarely intrinsic to the Aff plan, make all your arguments, i went for em. I love em.

of explanation, explain the CP's in the contest of the Aff advnatages and you should be good.
 * CP-** Advantage CP's, Aff-Specific, Mechanism CP's are the best. But they require more explanation. Speaking

Theory wise, if you win the theory flow, you win. But in my heart:

50 State Fiat is probably Bad Consults are prolly non-competitive International Actors are fine Functional Competition > Textual Competition Lit probably checks

I cant think of anything else right now.


 * Kritiks**- Besides having vague, unexplained, and abusive alternatives. I guess there okay. That was overrdramatic. I believe that K's are a vital resource to attack the aff's implications. But are rarely explained as they should be. Explain how the alternative functions in context of the plan. Compare Impacts. Dont just tell me the taglines over and over. K Framework is usally false. Aff- If you stand in the 2AR and say we have nuke war so we win, you will certainly lose.


 * Theory-** If you were abused go for it. If the drop it, Go for it. If not, let it go.