Skip to comments.VANITY -- My debate team went against Chris Coons, and WON!
Posted on 09/16/2010 8:23:19 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana
When I saw that Coons spent time in Yale, and was a two-time National Debate Champion, I had to look him up.
The name wasn't familiar to me at first. While the Yale debate team was good, they weren't tops when I was involved. First, I saw Coons' age ... 47. That means we attended college at the same time, and then I saw that he did his bachelors' work not at Yale, but at Amherst. Then everything clicked. I don't have television, and I tend not to view much video on the Internet for news. I remembered the Amherst team. The lead was medium ahort, prematurely balding with light hair. He looked older than his actual age. At the time I thought he might have been a grad student. His partner was quite short, with dark hair. I saw the picture, and then the name, Chris Coons ... clicked.
My teammate T.K. and I drew them at the Yale Parliamentary Debate Tournament in spring 1983. In that tournament, Coons did win the award for top speaker, as he had racked up the most points. But his team did not win the tournament, because they lost one debate, to my team.
Their sole loss came on what was called the announced topic. A Parliamentary tournament normally has a broad topic open to interpretation announced at the start of the debate. The Government has ten minutes to craft an argument in favor, and the Opposition can only use that time to anticipate points, but for the most part has to respond on the fly.
For this Tournament, one of the five debates was to be Announced Topic, where the Governnment would have weeks to prepare an argument, if they wished. The topic was, "You can't have it both ways." The Amherst team used the standard approach of forcing the opposition to defend an unpoopular proposition by interpreting the topic to discuss the U.S. internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII, forcing us to defend it, or at least to state that it wasn't hypocritical. My debate partner was definitely the more polished of the the two of us, and he did an excellent job defending the side we were assigned. I have a monotone, and had a bad habit of uhhing and ummmm-ing. When the debate was over Coons and his partner scored very well. Coons was smooth, his delivery practiced. He sounded very much like a professional ad pitchman for insurance or something. (That is not a putdown) He would sound professional if assigned anything. His partner did almost as well, not as smooth, but made no serious errors. I recall Coons scored something like a 45, and his partner a 44. I matched the artner at 44. My partner, who was no conservative (Mondale supporter), but rose to the topic effortlessly scored a 46 (or something like that, in any event we won by one point.)
That loss kept Amherst out of the finals, and probably denied them the championship. we only went 3-2, losing to a couple of lesser teams. But we were spot on against Chris Coons and his teammate.
If someone has access to the records from 1983 (Amherst/U of Chicago), I'd love to see them, as my copy is long gone.
My guess is that O’Donnell’s down to earth style will win the day when put up against slick, polished, elitist marxist drivel.
I hate talking about “unpoopular propositions!”
See my profile page, and my tagline
Getting points on a debate team in a competition is not the same as relating to general population’s line of reasoning....but it can be helpful, Depends on how personable he is....(My High School team won the national our Sr year)
His appearance is not in his favor.(Remember the study about the best hair wins) She wins in the smile and personality edge,(even the unflatering picture with her mouth open was “cute” and made the publisher of it looks mean) She needs to work on eye contact. Those qualities (presentation)aren’t judge in competition, but may have a great deal to do with a voter’s decision.
Good points all.
Indeed! You are more than entitled. As a former college debater I can relate perfectly to your triumph and would happily do the same!
Chris Coons = Master Debator!
Yeah. Seems to me that these political debates are rarely structured like the ones discussed here, if what I think I know is correct...
Just one look from George W. Bush at Al Gore physically moving in on him during that one debate scored more points for the camera than all Gore’s talking points... :-D
The Delaware “debates” will likely be TV ads, won’t they?
From what I have seen, Ms. O’Donnell is pretty fast on her feet with well delivered comebacks. I think she will do fine.Hopefully she can deliver a few blows on offense as well.
So, he’s a silver tongued marxist that “almost” made it into the finals claiming to be a two-time national champion.
Maybe those were different years.
I did CCX (Championship Cross-examination) on National Debate Topic (NDT).
My partner and I (also partners in high school), took 3rd place at the “Junior Nationals” in 1987. My point is, there are so many “national” championships for so many different styles of debate, etc. Still cool, but not quite as impressive as it sounds at first glance.
Your story on the other hand, is very cool.
-- From a former debate team captain and association president. Won our championship arguing "comparative advantage" from the negative position.
This is the kind of “personal” reports and stories that are completely “missing” about EVERY part of Obama’s background.
Sure, the birthers scream about that birth certificate. Ignore them.
But his high school records? Missing.
College (first time?) records? Missing.
College (second time) records and papers and thesis? Missing.
Grad school and Law School and Law Journal editing? Missing.
The reasons for yanking his Illinois law license? Missing.
for pulling Michelle’s law license? Missing.
His previous work and records and travel as a “community organizer”? Missing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.