theninjamonkey

write both and adjust to your opponents and judge. you will be better the more tools you have in your toolbox.

you are entitled to your opinion on kritiks, but i doubt youve ever given them an honest chance. try running one, one which you agree with, and you may change your mind. you dont have to read pomo to have some more tools in your toolbelt. having the option to run a k, even as a last resort, will make you a better debater as well.

You'll be fine, if it worries you you can just tell the judge before the round. They will be understanding. Or you could go the fun route, 'microaggressions don't exist'. I have cards if you want them lol.

open evidence isnt updated until mid august. check the umich website. they have some good preliminary ideas, but their only real use is cardmining.

do NOT concede that you are not topical. especially if you are reading a traditional aff. you will lose.

I have cards linking US arm sales to imperialism for trade if you want them.

That's pretty messed up of your coach to do, especially since not all students have the resources to attend summer debate camps.

message me. i have stuff available for trade which will suit your purposes.

Hey all, what's a good way to frame the militarism k on the neg against a soft-left aff? i'm somewhat cautious about criticizing them for still being militarists even though they reduce, because I really don't want to argue the merits of pragmatism every round.

Hey there! You might be lost. This website is specifically devoted to conversations and questions about policy debate. You might want to ask the same question on a camera-oriented subreddit?

probably too late, but sovereignty would be a good value

It's true that the community is mostly composed of leftists, but you can definitely still win on right-wing arguments. Even if your judge is a hardcore leftist, you can still present right-leaning arguments in a way that they would be appealing to leftists.