Calhoun+BL+v.+Chattahoochee+RW+-+Carrollton+Round+2


 * 1AC – I think you need to be firm on what type of vaccines you mandate – I think that you are allowing the negative too much PIC ground. The 1AC is fine, I’d continue to work on clarity still as in some parts of the 1AC you’re a little unclear.**


 * 1NC – I was really hoping for a Vaccines PIC, as per the cross-x. I think that the States can probably solve the aff – I think that you probably should do some type distribution counterplan. I think that you probably need to be going slower on some of this topicality shell. You’re a little unclear at the beginning on the T debate.**


 * 2AC – I think that the 2ac on politics needs to be way more organized – I think you’re all over the place with the arguments you’re making. I think if you devote 5 additional seconds of prep for this, you’d be able to fix it. You just need to make it easier for the judge to flow. I’m not sure as to how the utopian fiat and 50 states fiat are different. **


 * 2NC – I think you could probably be making less counterplan arguments and go more in on the Military disad and the case flow. I think that is the best 2NR option after the 2AC. She mishandles the Military disad really badly - and I think that you’re making the right arguments throughout most of the 2NC. I kind of understand where you’re going on the Coercion flow, but I’m not necessarily sure as to how this will play out in the 2NR. I think the arguments are not strong enough to go for in the 2NR, but rather it looks like a 1AR time suck. **


 * 1NR – Everything’s fine – you need to make the analysis as to why the utopian fiat and the 50 state fiat args are the same. I think that the politics flow is fine – you may want to be clearer on which arg on the line by line. **


 * 1AR – Memorize theory blocks. You’re a little top heavy again. You get to the Military flow with not much time left, but you manage to extend enough. **


 * 2NR – The part I’m unhappy about in the 2NR is the lack of a link analysis on the military disad. The only link analysis I’m getting is this new health care scenario. **


 * My problem with the nuclear war won’t happen arguments is that they don’t answer Rozy’s arguments for a world order where the US is not the hegemon. In the world where those arguments are answered, the disad has an impact. Then the problem becomes the link debate and the lack of extension. I think the 2NR’s analysis on the healthcare agenda link is good enough and the 1AR link concession gives the negative a little more wiggle room to get a chance of the link. This means the disad happens. In weighing the disad v. case, I think neither side is really doing a good job analyzing the impacts – although I do think the nuclear war does outweigh because the aff doesn’t necessarily solve the centaralization advantage.**