Chin,+Tiffany

--Good to start your speech with the "Aff drops federalism DA" in your overview and to pre-empt new 1AR arguments. --Good impact calculus on the Federalism Net-Benefit. --I thought you did a good job extending the Federalism net-benefit without making new arguments that would justify 1AR arguments. --I thought the overview on the Politics DA was better but it was still really wordy. The next time you do a Politics overview, I would really like for you to focus on word efficiency and be choosy about the arguments that you include. --Good expansion of the uniqueness debate. -- --Overall, I thought that your delivery was pretty good in the 1NC. I think I would like us to work a bit more on just increasing our volume just a bit. I can certainly hear you but I want you to command the room more. I would also like for us to continue to work on your speed. You had good clarity and you were very easy to flow. --Watch the order of the cards on the 1NC CP shell. You read a CP solvency card, then a Federalism link, then another CP solvency card, and then a Federalism impact. Keep the net-benefit together (the two federalism cards should be together at the bottom). --Watch your timing a bit more. You want to avoid jumping back and forth between the case flows. --Overall, good variety of case arguments in the 1NC. --I would like to see us have a bit more presence when being cross-examined. I felt we were struggling at times with the questions we are asked. Try to give the appearance you know what the answer is (even if you don't :) ). You just have a confused look on your face. :) --Good OV on the federalism net-benefit. I thought you did a good job extending on this but (a) I would mention that the 2AC dropped it and (b) why the permutation does not solve for it. Federalism is a balance of power between the federal government and the states. On face, the permutation is that. --I am glad we are trying to utilize impact calculus wording, but it is difficult to invoke magnitude and so forth when extending case defense on the oil dependence. --I am glad we have an overview on Politics - I would like to see it a bit more structured. Utilize those impact calc words more often - magnitude, timeframe, probability, DA turns case. --You do a pretty good job on the uniqueness portion on the Politics DA. I would like one more card about why it would not pass. You are definitely winning that Obama is pushing the blockage but you need to secure that it won't pass now. --Good arguments against the "fiat solves the link". I would add that fiat does not solve the aftermath. Lawmakers may vote for the plan but they may do so begrudgingly AND it may costs Obama a lot of influence. Fiat does not solve post-vote. --REBUTTAL REDO: (1) Structure your overview a bit more on politics; (2) Read another "won't pass now" card on the uniqueness debate; (3) avoid trying to make impact calculus overviews on your case defense; (4) Explain why the perm does not solve for federalism and argue that the Aff 100% conceded the net-benefit.
 * __Rebuttal Redo for Practice Debate #2 - 07/16/2012 - Comments by Tara__**
 * __Practice Debate #2 - Neg vs. Avi/Isabella - 07/13/2012 - Comments by Tara__**

--Overall, I am very impressed with two things: the number of cards you turned in and the perfect formatting of the cards. There are a ton of cards here, which shows that you are focused in and out of lab, which I love seeing. Also, these cards are formatted perfectly - I did not have to do any tweaking. -- If I had one overall piece of advice for you as we move forward is to try to make sure you are assessing the utility of the cards. Do cards that talk about ATC tech in other countries apply? How can I use those cards in a debate? Are my cards making an argument or just giving me factual statements that will never be contested by the Negative? Those questions get easier to answer as you do more and more research. -- You have the fundamentals down - I am excited to see the progress in your research you are certainly going to make while you are here!
 * __Research Feedback - Research Set #1 from Wave #1 - Due on 07/10 - feedback given on 07/12 by Tara__**

--Students were asked to create a five minute Negative block speech to extend an Obama Good Elections DA. Students were given the 1NC shell and a file of potential cards they could use for their extensions. They used their own 2ACs from the night before as the 2AC to answer when they gave the extension speech. --Look up more --Nice speed and clarity—don’t they have an internal to warming? --Nice job with gw v. econ --What is your impact absent warming? --Nice job with indicting their ability to solve? --Uniqueness--Good "even if"/Impact the timing even more/Explain why polls are better than their stuff --Link--Good extension of the 1nc evidence/Nice indict of their evidence/Good to read another card in additions/WATCH OUT OUT FOR “ANY SPENDING” --Very good to read ev about a gw agreement --Good short term/long term distinction --Anthropogenic—why do you solve if its not anthro--How does Obama solve non-anthropogenic causes --:20 secs left
 * __Elections Negative Block Extension Speech - 07/10/2012 - Comments by Nate__ **