|
Mike Chen and Nathan Graves |
POCATELLO—The majority of audience
members at a public debate about immigration reform on February 9 at Idaho
State University rejected the motion that the United States should deport
nearly all illegal immigrants, but the affirmative team arguing for the motion still
won by shifting audience opinion in its direction.
|
Michael Mares, Ethan Likness, Mike Chen, Nathan Graves |
|
Michael Mares and Ethan Likness |
In a vote
taken before the debate, zero percent of audience members supported the motion,
71 percent rejected it, and 29 percent were undecided.
|
Audience Vote Prior to the Debate |
Following the debate, 29
percent supported the motion, 69 percent rejected it, and zero percent were
undecided.
|
Audience Vote After the Debate |
The winner of the debate was decided by which team had most swayed
audience opinion.
|
Voting Breakdown |
"In a
sense, both teams won. One team was supported by a majority of the audience
while the other team changed more minds,” said Sarah Partlow Lefevre, ISU
Director of Debate.
Erik Ekstrom, a new ISU debater, was in the audience. He said, "This was one of the first debate events that I experienced at ISU, and it was good enough to make me want to debate more"
The
affirmative team, arguing in favor of the motion, included Senior Michael Mares
and Freshman Ethan Likness, both of Pocatello.
The negative team, arguing against the motion, included Junior Mike Chen, of Casper, Wyo.,
and Senior Nate Graves, of Arco.
|
Nathan Graves |
Nate Graves said, "For me. the success of the public debate could be mesaured in how the audience reacted. Not so much in the way they voted for the winners and the losers, but, in their response to the topic. It was a controversial topic, one where discussion is desperately needed in public discourse. The fact that there were more questions directed at the debaters than time alotted for answering questions is a clear indicator that the topic was appropriate and is one that people care about. The overall objective of debate as a practice is to open up the communication channels on sensitive or controversial topics that might not otherwise be discussed in a public forum. This is what we accomplished with our public debate on immigration reform in the US."
The debate
was sponsored by The James M. and Sharon E. Rupp Debate Society, an
ASISU organization sponsored by K-ISU Radio. For more information about the
debate program at ISU, contact Partlow Lefevre at
partsara@isu.edu, or Assistant Coach Casey
Santee at santcase@isu.edu.
|
Michaal Mares |
|
Ethan Likness and Michael Mares |
|
Mike Chen |
No comments:
Post a Comment