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: Teresa Nuckolls (University Middle School) vs. Opposition: HILARY FUNG (Po Leung Kuk Camoes Tan Siu Lin Primary School)

Judge: Emily Mendelson (Binghamton University)

Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.

  • Teresa Nuckolls
    Teresa Nuckolls

    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at May 11, 2020 07:16:00PM EST by Teresa Nuckolls



    Posted at May 12, 2020 12:38:47PM EST by HILARY FUNG



    Author 13/05/2020

    Posted at May 13, 2020 06:11:23PM EST by Teresa Nuckolls



    Posted at May 15, 2020 08:24:44AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz



    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 15, 2020 07:24:30PM EST by Teresa Nuckolls




    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at May 16, 2020 09:29:58PM EST by Emily Mendelson

    Category Teresa Nuckolls HILARY FUNG
    Use of evidence: 4.9 4.8
    Delivery skill: 5.2 4.3
    Coherence of arguments: 5 3.9
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.8 4.6
    Identification of key points: 4.8 4.4
    Comments: Great job! I wish you extended your contentions more clearly in the last speech, especially the econ advantage from the first constructive. I think this is a good easier to what I think your opponent's argument about how taxes would hurt poor people. However, I am impressed by your ability to impact turn taxes so I do not think this is an issue for you in this debate. I also think your human rights contention is an easy answer to her argument about whether healthcare should be provided as per the constitution. Overall, it was great! Great job! I would make sure that every argument you make has a claim, a warrant, and an impact. Think of this as what you're saying + why it's true + why it matters. That way, the judge has a tangible thing to vote on that could be a negative effect of universal healthcare. I like your argument that more taxes would hurt poor people, but I need a reason why that is true and why it matters (ex: economic inequality would increase, diseases would increase with more housing precariousness) to really be convinced to vote for it.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Teresa Nuckolls

    Reason for Decision:

    I vote affirmative because I think COVID-19 proves uniquely how it is important for everyone to have a right to access healthcare. I agree that a lack of access to preventative care leads to more serious health conditions, which would make diseases and deaths even worse. Great job everyone!

    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: