Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: ben xu (Binghamton University) vs. Opposition: Jordan Knight (Binghamton University)

Judge: Joe Leeson-Schatz (Binghamton University)

Resolution: RESOLVED: Sugary drinks should not be sold in primary and secondary schools.

  • ben xu
    ben xu

    Jordan  Knight
    Jordan Knight
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at February 26, 2014 08:26:43PM EST by ben xu



    "Mississippi State Department of Health ." Sugary Drinks and Childhood Obesity . N.p.. Web. 26 Feb 2014. <,2809,151,299.html>.

    "JAMA networks." Sugary Drinks and Childhood Obesity. N.p., 06 April 2009. Web. 26 Feb 2014. <>.

    "healthy communities for a healthy future." Economic cost of Obesity . N.p.. Web. 26 Feb 2014. <>.

    Whiteman, Honor. "Soda drinks may make children more aggressive and distracted." MNT. (2013): n. page. Web. 26 Feb. 2014. <>.

    Bray, George. "How bad is fructose?." American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. n. page. Print. <>.

    "Sugary Drinks and Obesity Fact Sheet." Sugary Drinks and Obesity Fact Sheet. Harvard University . Web. 26 Feb 2014. <>.

    Posted at February 27, 2014 09:40:15PM EST by Jordan Knight




    Posted at February 28, 2014 10:49:05PM EST by ben xu



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at March 2, 2014 09:10:02PM EST by Jordan Knight



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at March 3, 2014 07:45:37PM EST by ben xu



    None available for this speech.


    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at March 4, 2014 12:11:17PM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Category ben xu Jordan Knight
    Use of evidence: 5 5
    Delivery skill: 4 5.1
    Coherence of arguments: 4.9 4.5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 5 5.1
    Identification of key points: 4.5 4.8
    Comments: Try to talk with more energy instead of just using a monotone voice. Reference your sources in your speech when listing out facts such as liver harm etc. You do this more later on in your speech than you do at the start. You also need to have a terminal impact to health/obesity. Ie who cares if people aren't healthy? Why does this matter?

    The first 12 seconds of your speech has no sound. Make sure you watch your video before posting in order to ensure things like that doesn't happen. Also you have a lot of "uhhhs" in your speech. Try to eliminate these as much as possible. A lot of your answers to the CP are defensive. Just like on the opp side, you need offensive reasons for why your proposal is better.

    You need to answer the CP directly in your last speech more exclusively. Ie prove and impact out your tax argument.
    Why do you keep referring to yourself as an "it" instead of "I"? You spend a lot of time on the defensive portion of your speech. Try to get to the offense quicker and spend more time there. Good CP when you finally get there. If you lead with that then all of your defensive arguments you're making sound more offensive since you can explain how your CP solves those problems, which is why the CP would have a clear net-benefit.

    I would continue to provide additional sources in your second speech, especially if some of your initial evidence is called into question. Your continual emphasis on the CP is good. You should do a better job at explaining how the CP solves the problems that you're pointing out.

    The decision is for the Opposition: Jordan Knight

    Reason for Decision:

    I think the CP solves better than the plan does for the harms outlined by the proposition in his first speech. I think the prop needs to explain the tax dis/ad to the CP more than he does in order to explain how taxes would hurt the economy and what the terminal impact to hurting the economy is (ie is it greater than solving obesity and health). Since both sides indicate that health is is the major impact of the debate I vote for the CP since it solves them better. If the prop would weigh economy versus health I could have maybe voted against the CP.

    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by: