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: Ciara Conroy (Unaffiliated) vs. Opposition: Aaron Felings (Unaffiliated)

Judge: Michelle Thomas (Unaffiliated)

Resolution: Resolved: Governments should implement a meat tax.

  • Ciara Conroy
    Ciara Conroy
    vs.



    Aaron Felings
    Aaron Felings
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at April 20, 2020 10:01:35PM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 21, 2020 08:00:41PM EST by Aaron Felings

    Citations

    Show

    none

    Posted at April 23, 2020 09:18:40AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at April 23, 2020 04:07:50PM EST by Aaron Felings

    Citations

    Show

    none

    Posted at April 25, 2020 09:19:57AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at April 25, 2020 06:22:25PM EST by Michelle Thomas

    Category Ciara Conroy Aaron Felings
    Use of evidence: 2 1.8
    Delivery skill: 4.3 4.1
    Coherence of arguments: 4.2 4.1
    Responsiveness to opponent: 5.1 5.1
    Identification of key points: 4.6 4.7
    Comments: Constructive - You need more evidence to back up your points. You have a lot of hypothetical arguments without citations to prove it to be true. But great delivery and diversity in arguments!

    Rebuttal - Good job identifying and answering each argument your opponent made. You did lose a lot of the original arguments you made though of explaining why a world government is good from the constructive. Pick one more besides just war and I think that would be good.


    Closing - Good job answering what arguments needed to be answered and extending your own constructive argument. I do think you can do a good job kind of explaining how your argument of solving war matters more than his arguments about how a world government would be hard to form.
    Constructive - You need more evidence to prove your points to be true. Your also asking a lot of hypothetical questions without tying it to an impact - for instance, you say different currencies, why would that matter? could it maybe hurt the economy? Good pace of speaking though and smart arguments.

    Rebuttal and closing _ You also did a great job identifying arguments that were made and answering them in an easy to follow order. I do think we lost our best argument though about backlash - many of your examples don't have an impact other than being things that might make forming the government difficult.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Ciara Conroy

    Reason for Decision:

    I vote pro - I think a world government would result in less wars and less death around the world. I think the pro does a good job explaining how a world government would be able to solve all of the problems the con brought up - for example, the issue with languages gets solved by a translator.


    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:

    PHP MySQL SUIT