Noasie+vs.+Ayana+-+Bryan

Word bank: democratization, stifles
 * Josie**

Speed shouldn’t trade off with clarity. It’s still early in the season, but keep reading through your ev out loud, work on your speed drills, and watch your posture. GWOT scenarios are dated at this point; if you want to roll with Helms Burton, you’ll want to update your security MPX.

When you’re way behind on an arg, use your roadmap and first 10 seconds of the 1AR to reframe the round and push the discussion to an arg where you’re competitive (e.g. “The CP can’t solve the aff b/c preconditions on engagement kill U.S. soft power; let’s move to S where we win this arg.”) ßsee, you didn’t actually say anything, but you shifted the focus to something where you can possibly win. Your 1AR needs to bring across evidence and not just analysis. The way you do this is by discussing the data/warrants and then citing it (“That’s our _ evidence.”)

Word bank: multipolarity, analogues, insurrections
 * Noah**

You’re on the right track with the probability question on the CP, but go even further and ask where the evidence indicates that Cuba says yes. Starting questions like this is an excellent way to save time and force their hand to begin with.

Analytics can work for certain types of arguments, but why would a judge prefer mitigation analytics (“what if it’s not 100% true”) when her evidence suggests there’s at least some (significant) chance of the L triggering the MPX. Ouch—you waaay undercover the CP. Can’t do this. Spend time in prep working through the following: perms, can’t solve the case, turns on the DA/NB. Your Perez 10 ev has a laundry list of warrants; be sure to emphasize these as your reading through the card—something to indicate that you’ll return to them in rebuttals.

Word bank: legitimize, Boehner
 * Tiana**

Open with a more direct line of questioning. (“Tell me more about…” shouldn’t be a part of your CX. Move them toward yes/no responses by leading them to your conclusion and then asking, “right?” You do this later but it sounds like you don’t know what you want out of her responses.) Organization on your CP: make sure your NB ptix scenario is clear (you didn’t know where you wanted to flow the DA) AT CP analytics: make sure to discuss why “if” analysis concedes a risk of the L—and in this case (since they didn’t read any ev to the contrary) a very high risk of the L; now move to discussing why the !’s magnitude makes this important