[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: Process Disads -Reply to Croasmun
croasmun@juno.com said:
>
>Cool. A topic on Presidential selection process, or Presidential powers,
>or campaign finance, etc., would do it better. But these arguments can
>appear on any topic, and trade off against research and understanding of
>that topic area. Example: how many teams do you think (on last year's
>topic) spent more time and carried more evidence on sulphur dioxide than
>they did on Clinton's popularity?
>
I don't know exactly what you define the heart of the topic to be, but
political process was a big part of the literature last year. Saying that
people should have shyed away from Clinton on that resolution is like
saying they shouldn't have run Biz Con! I can't count the number of cards
being written DAILY that the environment would be the biggest issue in the
election... and it was true. It could be hypothesized that the reason the
Republicans maintained the House was because they started to back down by
passing legislation that was environment friendly.
Point is, just because you don't like it doesn't make it a bad argument,
and it especially doesn't make it peripheral to the topic. Often times,
issues are politically charged and there will be ramifications that go
beyond the obvious advantages and disadvantages. If people want to debate
those ramifications out...let them.
erik
Follow-Ups:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page