2008 NFA LD Debate Nationals Final Round Part 5

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
4,659
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Apr 22, 2008

2008 final round in NFA LD.
Resolved: The US federal government should substantially increase assistance to the Greater Horn of Africa in one of the following areas: economic development, human rights protection, or public health.
For more information, go to:
http://cas.bethel.edu/dept/comm/nfa/n...

Affirmative (Senior, Spencer Harris from Drury University) wins on a 5-0 decision over the Negative (Sophomore, Jessica Furgerson from Western Kentucky University).


Spencer's last rebuttal. Case to use strategic marketing for condom distribution programs in Uganda.

Category:

Education

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 0 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (iliketrains76)

  • This is not LD. This was last years policy topic, and you are running DAs, referring to links, and talking at Advanced Policy speed.

  • This is LD POLICY. It is a policy topic with DAs and links. The question being discussed is whether speed is acceptable.

  • FYI, the Affirmative (Senior, Spencer Harris from Drury University) wins on a 5-0 decision over the Negative (Sophomore, Jessica Furgerson from Western Kentucky University).

    Congratulations to both debaters on reaching the finals!

  • That's important info I should have posted.  Thanks for the details, Boyer. Feel like posting a video RFD?

see all

All Comments (21)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • lol "there are more reasons to vote for the affirmative than there are ld debaters"

  • In the end, he only had a few key arguments, and won with those because they were strong. Neither debater tried to win by spreading the other out of the round (a fancy way of saying avoiding clash). I respect that, and I wish more LDers (especially old fashioned judges and coaches) were friendlier to faster, more technical debate, as long as it retains its persuasion and and academic integrity.

  • This was a very good round. As a high school LDer, I get really pissed off when people use speed and carded evidence, but ONLY when they use those methods to avoid clash, skimp on analysis, and not link through. All the AFF's arguments were well constructed, and he used his increased speed (not nearly policy speed, I know) to go deeper with his analytics instead of just reading more arguments.

  • he's a little faster than normal. not bad for nationals i guess

  • thats not even 250.

    try maybe 130, 150 tops.

    nevertheless, this is a nice speed for ld'ers

  • hahaaaaaaaaaaa hahaha he talks so high ....

  • I debate policy too. I didn't say that people don't go faster, they go much faster. What I said was that people who are unfamiliar with policy often perceive this kind of thing as fast.

  • I debate policy- i'm pretty sure im like 3x faster than this and alot of people are alot- he's going like 250 wpm

  • If you've never debated policy before, this is extremely fast.

  • how is this fast

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more