Every grandmother should have an I-phone

Thank you for that post.I'm going to give a simple reason to support my side, and then I'll do my thing.My reason: Because grandmothers with iPhones are hilarious, but it wouldn't be if they all had one.Let me explain. There are several things that were funny at first that got ruined by being over played. These things include the following: The Harlem Shake, The Fox by YLvis, the music video to Happy by Pharrell Williams, claiming to be a 90's kid on every social media site ever, half of the memebases that everyone repeats memes for, Justin Beiber getting hit in the face with a water bottle, Obama failing to read his teleprompters, Spy Kids, 9gag, and Jimmy Neutron.Do you want to add something as hilarious as grandmothers using iPhones to that list? I hope your answer is "no."Regardless, it's definitely a contention for negation.Make sure to read this part if you're already skimming-> Now, my opponent provided a plan, which means we're doing this policy style. In policy, you can offer a K, which is a crituqe of the resolution itself or of the debate. You can win if you're correct in your K and your opponent can't refute it's signficance. Guess what I'm going to do. That's right. I'm going to run a few K's.First K: Why are we even debating this?Well, we have two reasons: it was Fanaths' idea, and he wants to steal my trolling badge. Now, I'm not so sure we can trust Fanath's ideas if he's just going to leave out step 2 in his plans. Also, stealing is generally considered immoral, and it hurts people. Therefore we shouldn't steal. So this whole resolution is unpragmatic and immoral.Second K: I'm the prophet of Morgan Freeman.It has been established that I am the prophet of Morgan Freeman. This is like an undisputable fact. Because of this, the fact that Fanath disagrees with me automatically makes him wrong.Third K: Dude, stop.Could I resist? Nope, sure couldn't.Fourth K: I ain't even mad.As you can tell, I'm entirely unphased by my opponent's case. This is important to remember for a troll debate. It's about who trolls the hardest too. And if my opponent brings up that he's not mad either, don't trust him. He's lying.As a final statement to keep in the spirit of policy debate, I hereby announce that my opponent's plan will bring about nuclear war.If every grandmother gets an iPhone, then demand for iPhones will obviously go up. That means that the supply must also increase to match that. To make an iPhone you need to use plastic. To make plastic you need oil. Under current US law, we need to phone a friend for that, which would be someone in the Middle East. If we keep spending more and more money on their oil, we're going to go run up our debt even faster. If we run up our debt even faster, someone who we're indebted to is probably going to get ticked off. Since we're usually indebted to countries with nuclear armaments, they'll probably launch nuclear missiles at us. If they launch nuclear missiles at us, the Middle East will attack them for trying to destroy their new biggest customer. If the Middle East gets involved, then everyone gets involved. If everyone gets involved then the world will go into a nuclear apocalypse. And we just can't have that.Thank you for reading my case, and I look forward to my opponent's response!