Maekki+vs.+Dwianne+-+ryan

AFF:

Meagan: Work on your breathing; you're out of breath by the end of your 1AC and it affects your pronunciation on some pretty important points (democracy, hegemony). On CX answers, reference your ev to strengthen your responses. Remember, its OK and even strategic to concede specific links IF you're confident you can win at the internal link and impact level. It doesn't help you much to deny your inherency just to link out of politics (bad trade off).

Nicole: You need to discuss CP competition at the top of your speech--and "perm do both" is NOT a sufficient argument. Explain how this functions, because I'm sure not going to make one up for you. Also, you're not contextualizing your arguments in terms of anything your opponents are saying--frame arguments using "they say..." followed with evidence to the contrary. I'm not sure what half of this evidence is clashing with. Warrants: where are they? Why is now key to solve Cuban reform? Where is this evidence and why does it say this is true? And why does it matter it terms of the neg's arguments?

NEG:

Julianne: During CX, know what you and your partner are running so you can ask leading questions. Like we discussed, use closed-ended questions to get them to concede links to your arguments (political capital, capitalism/US markets, etc). During your 1NC, work on explaining the net benefits to the counterplan--politics, trade relations, Iran scenario). Remember how to explain the net benefit--there needs to be a reason the CP can solve the aff AND avoid the DA (i.e. immigration reform).

Dwight: As we discussed, you need to address your opponents argument before furthering your own. By just reading cards on the DA, you miss the clash between your two positions and leave it to the judge to fill in the blanks. Don't let them make up their mind for themselves when you can do it for them. Careful not to switch between the CP and DA on your flow. Keep things organized.