THIS is why Vance EASILY beat Walz! | Debate Teacher Reacts

Debate Strategy and Why Vance Won the Stage

Margaret, the rules were that you guys were going to fact check. And since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on.

So many things about this clip. So many things. First of all,.

Just to follow up on that, the question was, can you explain the discrepancy?

All I said on this was, is I got there that summer and misspoke on this. So I will just, that's what I've said.

Oy vey. This is why debates are more than just mere talking points from a political platform. They come down to key moments that communicate to the audience who is winning without even saying a word. I've been harping on certain things that you need to do on the debate stage, if you are going to succeed and take home the win.

And let's face it, while I am a Christian, this is true for any debater on any issue. All of this comes back to prep, but not any old kind of prep. The way you prep is going to set you up for either victory or failure.

And I think this was evident in the Vance Walls debate the other night. By the way, if this is your first time here, welcome. My name is Nate, and this is Wise Disciple, where I'm helping you become the effective Christian that you are meant to be.

If you think this video is helpful to you, would you like and sub and even share this with someone else? I'd really appreciate it. All right. Well, we're going to get into the debate here. Here's the first thing that I.

Drills, Time Constraints, and Rehearsed Answers

Noticed. Now you asked Margaret, what would immediately change the equation for American citizens? If you lower energy prices, as Donald Trump says, drill, baby drill, one of the biggest drivers of housing costs aside from illegal immigration is think about it.

If a truck driver is paying 40 more for diesel, then the lumber he's delivering to the job site to build a house is also going to become a lot more expensive. If we open up American energy, you will get immediate pricing relief for American citizens, not by the way, just in housing, but in a whole host of other economic goods too.

Senator Vance, you still have 23 seconds there.

Do you want to answer where? So did you catch that? J .D. Vance said everything he wanted to say and still had 20 seconds left on that clock. Now, sometimes that's because a rookie is going to get nervous and they'll just run out of things to say, but that's not Vance.

Vance is no rookie. Most of the time, unless he wanted to like press an issue, Vance always said what he needed to say within the time constraints allotted to him. In other words, he hardly ever ran over time.

Now this tells us something, okay? It tells us that he ran drills in his prep. And I think that's as clear as day. So if you're thinking about this as a potential debater, right? You're thinking about getting on the stage yourself.

That means you have to do certain things in your lead up to the debate to ensure that you are ready to get on that stage. And one of those things is running drills. If you notice above the moderators, there is a huge clock that runs down the exact minutes and the seconds that Vance and Walz are given to answer a question.

I can't find a still for that, but it's there. You can see it if you go back and take a look at it. So what you'll notice is the moderators will explicitly tell the debaters, you have two minutes or you have one minute to respond.

And then the clock starts to count down. Like I said, Vance almost always said exactly what he needed to say with excellent amounts of substance and never ran over time. I can tell you right now that ability only comes from running drills, running drills, running mock debates in your prep.

In other words, Vance practiced and rehearsed these things over and over and over again with his team and not just the issues and the questions that he would face, but he practiced the precise answers that he would say to those questions over and over and over again.

And he did so under time constraints, which actually unlock something inside your mind. Like if you think about it, because the more you say the same thing over and over again, guess what? The easier it is to explain it.

One of the unique practices that you can do as a debater, by the way, this doesn't just apply to debates. Like this just applies to talking to people in regular conversations as well, particularly conversations where you know that somebody is going to come at you with a different position.

This applies not just to regular conversations, but also to marketing or, you know, even pitching a project or a movie to Hollywood. Like there's so many applications for this, but it comes down to this, figuring out how to explain a concept in one paragraph, in one sentence, and even just a couple of words.

Okay. When you do that, when you practice explaining concepts in this way, it forces you to refine your language about a thing without losing the essence of that thing. And that, that right there helps you to understand the concept even better than you did before.

So the fact that Vance was so clear and concise shows that he rehearsed these responses in his prep and he ensured that he could communicate precisely what was necessary and sufficient given the time constraints.

Here's something else I noticed.

Preparing for Fact Checks and Staying Composed

Thank you, Governor. And just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status, temporary protected status. Senator, we have so much to get to.

I think it's important because the rules were that you guys were going to fact check. And since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP one app, where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand.

That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for 10 years. That is the facilitation of a legal immigration, Margaret, by our own leadership.

So many things about this clip, so many things. First of all, here's a question. How did Vance know just the right substantive response to give in the moment that he was fact checked? Right. For a lot of other people on that debate stage, they would have been caught surprised.

They would have been back on their heels by what took place with the moderators there. Why was he prepared? And the answer is because he prepared to be fact checked, probably on that very issue. He prepared for the moderators to fact check him.

He worked it into his prep. This leads to another principle that I think is best exemplified on this stage. Did you notice that Walls throughout the debate is constantly looking down, constantly writing things down?

Whenever Vance is saying something, Walls is looking down and just on his notepad, he's writing ferociously, right? Vance doesn't do that. Vance brought something to the podium, but as far as I could tell, it's probably an iPad.

But he's not writing anything down. Why? Because he probably came to the podium with briefs that he prepared ahead of time on a variety of potential topics that he could simply open up with a couple of clicks on his device.

But again, this goes back to preparation. I see. I don't need to know Vance's team or his coach to know that their goal was to ensure that there were no surprises for Vance on that stage. And that appears to be the case.

Okay. Notice even when Vance was fact checked, he didn't lose his cool. And he came back with a response that gave a direct rejoinder to the moderators. He knew they were going to do that. I'm telling you.

And he was ready. So what does this mean for you as a debater? Well, it means that nothing on that debate stage should catch you by surprise. That should be one of your primary goals going into a debate.

And again, this doesn't just have to be about debate. It could be going into a conversation with somebody you disagree with. Nothing should catch you by surprise. Your prep, in that sense, should accurately predict what will ultimately happen on that stage before you ever get out there.

Walls, on the other hand, was caught left-footed multiple times on that stage. The biggest blunder for him was when he was asked about Tiananmen Square.

Take a look at this. Just to follow up on that, the question was, can you explain the discrepancy?

All I said on this was, is I got there that summer and misspoke on this. So I will just. That's what I've said. So I was in Hong Kong and China during the democracy protest went in. And from that, I learned a lot of what needed to be in governance.

Thank you, Governor. Oy vey. This is why debates are more than just mere talking points from a political platform. They come down to key moments that communicate to the audience who is winning without even saying a word.

Laying a Framework for the Audience

Here's something else that I noticed. Take a look at this. Ask yourself at home. When.

When was the last time I'm 40 years old? When was the last time that an American president didn't have a major conflict breakout? The only answer is during the four years that Donald Trump was president.

And I'd ask my fellow Americans to remember when she came into office, she said she was going to do this. Real leadership would be saying, you know what? I screwed up. We're going to go back to Donald Trump's border policies.

I wish that she would do that. It would be good for all of us. Something that these guys do is they make a lot of claims about if Donald Trump becomes president, all of these terrible consequences are going to ensue.

But in reality, Donald Trump was president. Inflation was low. Take home pay was higher. And he saved the very program from a Democratic administration that was collapsing and would have collapsed absent his leadership.

These are just three examples of something that I've been talking about again and again in debate videos. Arguably, this is the most consistent thing that I've been trying to say, a point that I've been driving home as much as possible.

It's laying a framework for the audience, laying a framework essentially refers to the act of narrating to the audience how to think through the issues and judge the debate. Now, obviously, a particular opponent is going to lay a framework in a manner that is advantageous to their position.

But nevertheless, this is vital to a debate in terms of strategy. As a matter of fact, it is so important that the unspoken rule in debate is whoever lays a better framework typically wins, even if they lack substance.

That's how important this is. If you think about it, it makes sense. In a substantive debate like this, where a lot of statistics and data is cited, many are coming out now saying this is way more substantive than the one between Trump and Harris.

The audience is not going to remember everything. As a matter of fact, some say that the audience really only remembers the first few minutes and the last few minutes of a debate. And that probably speaks more to our declining attention span than anything else.

But the bottom line is, it's useful to help the audience think through the debate in this way, to tell the story of the debate in a manner that guides their thinking when it comes to the topic and the various arguments, right?

Vance did this way better than Walz. He just completely outperformed Walz on a ton of issues, but he really kept laying that framework over and over again for the audience. As opposed to Walz, who seemed more on his heels for a lot of the debate and reactionary in that sense, trying to catch his footing, saying a few good things, but largely missing opportunities to what Vance did.

This matters, ladies and gentlemen. Some of you are thinking, oh, Nate, the policy plans, the platform stances, those are the things that truly matter. That's what I'm paying attention to. That's not true in debate though.

What matters in debate is that your position beats your opponent's. And because the audience is largely made up of people who are not policy wonks by any stretch, okay, they're going to need help understanding the issues as they track the clash in real time.

And any debater, any debater does themselves a huge service by laying their own framework and then relaying it again and again and again. And that, all of that just comes out of thinking through your opponent's arguments, what you're going to hear them say way before you ever step out on that stage.

So once again, this comes back to how you prep, all right? Now, these are not the only things to say about this debate. I think Vance also outperformed Walz on just about every metric, whether it was his policy positions or how he challenged Walz's arguments, or even just simply his non-verbals.

I mean, look at this. Walz just looked confused and perplexed most of the time. Look at that. Well, Vance often looked like Jim from The Office, kind of sideways glancing at the camera as if to say, nah, right?

Well, anyway, a little bit outside the scope of what I usually talk about, but those are my thoughts. I hope something here blessed you, but now it's your turn. What do you think about the Vance Walz debate?

Who really won and why? Let me know in the comments below. Hey, listen, I'm filming a series on debate that hopefully will be made available soon. So if you're a Christian who wants to get into debate, or again, maybe not, you just want to handle yourself in regular conversations with folks, then stay tuned to the channel because I'll announce all those things when the debate training goes live.

As always, if you made it this far, you got to get yourself over to my Patreon community, like right now. It's continuing to grow. There's lots of great discussions, cool features. We've got exclusive live streams, Zoom hangouts.

You can meet up with me one-on-one. We're studying the Bible together. Go check it out. The link for the Patreon is below. I will return soon with more videos, but in the meantime, I'll say bye for now.