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: Gabrielle Backman (Chenango Forks Middle School) vs. Opposition: Suraj Shah (The Pegasus School)

Judge: Arturo Feliz (Colegio Bilingüe New Horizons)

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

  • Gabrielle Backman
    Gabrielle Backman
    vs.



    Suraj Shah
    Suraj Shah
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at May 25, 2020 07:01:11PM EST by Gabrielle Backman

    Citations

    Show

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_United_Nations
    https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-news-stories/forced-to-flee-top-countries-refugees-coming-from
    https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
    https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/06/19/refugees-are-a-win-win-win-formula-for-economic-development/
    https://immigrationforum.org/article/immigrants-as-economic-contributors-refugees-are-a-fiscal-success-story-for-america/

    Posted at May 27, 2020 01:54:36AM EST by Suraj Shah

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 27, 2020 06:32:01PM EST by Gabrielle Backman

    Citations

    Show

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_United_Nations
    https://www.worldvision.org/refugees-news-stories/forced-to-flee-top-countries-refugees-coming-from
    https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
    https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/06/19/refugees-are-a-win-win-win-formula-for-economic-development/
    https://immigrationforum.org/article/immigrants-as-economic-contributors-refugees-are-a-fiscal-success-story-for-america/

    Posted at May 29, 2020 01:31:30AM EST by Suraj Shah

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at May 29, 2020 07:29:31PM EST by Gabrielle Backman

    Citations

    Show

    https://www.unrefugees.org/refugee-facts/statistics/

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at May 30, 2020 12:54:18PM EST by Arturo Feliz

    Category Gabrielle Backman Suraj Shah
    Use of evidence: 3 2
    Delivery skill: 3 3.5
    Coherence of arguments: 3 3.5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 3 3.4
    Identification of key points: 3 3
    Comments: Gabrielle I think you have lots of potential. I think you should work in organizing your case more and pushing the key points more insistently.

    I think your children refugees, and urgency arguments were pretty strong and you should have tried to lead the round there.

    You do make a a pretty strong technical claim that is unanswered and forces my hand.

    Your opponent's choice of framework and plan were pretty strong but evidence is not shared even when the opportunity is given.
    Suraj Excellent presentation skills and coherence of argumentation.

    I though your plan was interesting and I thought that your choice of framework "this debate is not about whether refugees should be allowed but about whether they should be allowed unconditionally" to me was a pretty solid choice. I think all things being equal you should have won this round easily.

    I think you make a grave technical mistake and here lies my problem.

    Your opponent calls your cards, questions them, challenges its dates, validity, and even good faith of them.

    I think that's a pretty serious call that I have to decide on. This becomes part of the debate.

    Your responses are pretty weak:

    1.-That your opponent could have asked for the cards by emailing.

    2.-That they're "all fairly recent", and that I should buy them.

    Here's the thing. I think:

    1.-The easiest thing was just to share them on your next speech.

    2.-It's not only your opponent who's interested in them. As soon as your opponent calls them, they become the judge's business as well. Now I want to see them.

    Here's the other thing. I always assume the good faith of debaters. When I go back to the round I see you used the "Marielita" Cuban mass immigration incident while taking quite a few liberties (contextualization for example) which raises a question on use of evidence.

    Add that to the challenge being made and you see why I have a problem with this round.

    In the future, if they call the cards, just share them. It's that simple.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Gabrielle Backman

    Reason for Decision:

    RFD I think all things being equal I would have gone opposition basically due to the plan, and framework. But things are not equal.

    Proposition calls evidence, questions and challenges both the validity, dates, and even good faith use of it. Opposition does not respond by sharing said evidence with proposition and judge.

    A bad faith claim should have been answered with providing all the evidence. The judge observes one instance of decontextualized use of evidence which props up the bad faith argument, for which there is no response.

    I feel I have no choice but to vote proposition.


    2 Comments

    Thanks Gabrielle! You were awesome! Congrats! - Suraj Shah on May 30, 2020 at 04:01PM EST
    Hey Suraj, great debate! You were amazing! - Gabrielle Backman on May 30, 2020 at 01:46PM EST

    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