A few days ago, my group and I had a debate with the topic of “Drug traffickers should receive the death penalty”. I was in the opposing team therefore my team did not agree to the topic. I was in the same group as Kayla, Yemi and Enrico. In my opinion, my group was very organized and we worked really well together. I was the second speaker with the topic of “Very few countries agree on the death penalty” I don’t think my argument was well structured since I got confused on what to say sometimes and some sentences didn’t make sense.

My group had 3 arguments, which were about human rights, the number of countries that oppose to the death penalty and giving the drug traffickers a second chance. In my opinion we had enough evidence to support the arguments to persuade the audience to agree with us. We could have argued much better if we weren’t so nervous and much more confident.

In my opinion, I did pretty well when I spoke but I stopped a lot to look at my q card because I forgot what I had to say next and if I tried to memorize it even more the night before, I would’ve remembered even more then I did and I wouldn’t have to look at my q card after every evidence I say. I don’t think I incorporated any of the aristotles persuasive techniques because I felt like I could’ve made my speech better and added the techniques to persuade others even more.

From the first debate, I don’t know which group should win since I think they both equally have good statements. In my opinion, I think I should get at least a 4 or a 5 because I was really nervous and I don’t think I did well enough in the speech since I stopped and looked at my q card a lot.