Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Moving the goalposts (or shifting the goalposts) is a metaphor, derived from goal-based sports such as football and hockey, that means to change the rule or criterion ("goal") of a process or competition while it is still in progress, in such a way that the new goal offers one side an advantage or disadvantage.
It is the seventh speech in the debate, given by the second negative speaker. The 2NR will often take the remainder of the negative's preparation time. The 2NR will usually only go for some of the arguments presented in the 1NC although community norms prevent it for going for 1NC arguments which were not extended in the negative block ...
The reason why, for example, "Turn the Link" is preferred speech over saying "Link Turn" is the action in the argument prefaces the rationale, the middle argument to be argued or proven or presented, and moves the debate forward as a matter of understanding and separates whose argument is whose rather than assuming the movement of the debate is ...
In policy debate, Lincoln-Douglas debate, and public forum debate, the flow (flowing in verb form) is the name given to a specialized form of shorthand which debaters use to keep track of all of the arguments in the round.
The first speech each person gives is called a “constructive” speech, because it is the speech when the first person of the team speaks positively, presenting the team's main idea without rebuttals that have not occurred, presents the basic arguments they will make throughout the debate.
Kamala Harris will deliver a “closing argument” speech in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday at the site where Donald Trump spoke shortly before the Jan. 6 riot, according to a senior campaign official.
An illustration of the Overton window, along with Treviño's degrees of acceptance. The Overton window is the range of subjects and arguments politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time. [1]
In competitive debate, an advantage is the way that the affirmative team refers to the positive consequences of adopting their position on the debate resolution.It is an argument structure that seeks to convince the judge that the affirmative plan, if adopted, would result in a net-beneficial improvement to the status quo.