Carly Rose Sonenclar Should've Won X Factor Season 2

I shall now do some deeper rebuttal and then move on to sum up this debate for the Opposition which will leave the voters with no doubts whatsoever about who has won. Rebuttal I: "Stevens did not purely get the pity vote but it was a high percentage of the results. "This statement is still unwarranted. You THINK he got the pity vote but you have no reliable way of proving it. This is an assumption on your part therefore I win this point. Rebuttal II: "He was also too consistent, not having the same wow factor as CRS's performances. "Again, my opponent has contradicted themselves. In her opening statement she praised CRS for being consistent, yet she now criticises Stevens for his consistency. Regardless of this, consistency is a good thing. If CRS's 'wow factor' came from the fact she was inconsistent she must have had some awful weeks. Rebuttal III: "Undoubtedly some producer would try to get to him ASAP. "Again, this is unwarranted, you have supplied no information or examples to support your argument. I've given examples of people dropped after a single flop who end up in a similar or worse position to their lives before The X Factor. Proposition is simply making unwarranted assumptions, Opposition takes the point. Rebuttal IV: "Logically, [Fifth Harmony fans] would turn to CRS. ". .. or, being stroppy young girls, they probably just wouldn't vote in the final? Again an unwarranted assumption, Opposition wins this point as Proposition hasn't demonstrated why they would simply switch over to CRS as if Fifth Harmony had never existed. Rebuttal V: "CRS has a strong voice, does beautiful vocal gymnastics, and works the stage well. "So does Stevens! You just prefer CRS because you're a 12 year old! It appeals more to your market, but the fact is that you are slating Stevens without realising that not everyone thinks like you do. Just because Stevens doesn't appeal as much to YOUR demographic it does not make him inherently inferior. Proposition is citing their own opinion as a national trend even though the figures on the night show it is not, so Opposition win this point. Rebuttal VI: "I have noticed country singers winning the majority of singing competition shows. "This would seem to suggest that - shock and horror - people QUITE LIKE COUNTRY SINGERS. Just because they're winning similar shows that doesn't mean that you shouldn't vote for them. These shows exist to find the public's favourite act, a concept the Proposition does not seem to have gotten to grips with. This is not a valid reason for CRS to win over Stevens so Opposition wins on this. Rebuttal VII: "CRS may just be amazing at managing money. "Again we're making assumptions, I will accept, but my assumption is more grounded because years of social history and scientific research have shown that, on the whole, minors are not trustworthy with money. Justin Bieber spends $50,000 per week on parties and designer clothes. This is a speculative substantive but my speculation is grounded and better-informed so Opposition takes the point. Rebuttal VIII: "It does not always end up with the winner not being popular. "This statement isn't opinionated, it's a genuine trend. You cite Kelly Clarkson and Phillip Phillips. Phillips is the most recent winner, hence still being well-known, and Clarkson was the first winner hence the fact that she is still popular (i. e. she is more famous as an artist in her own right than as an American Idol alumnus). These are two cherry-picked examples. Now let's look at examples from across the world which support my argument. Winners who failed include Steve Brookstein, Ruben Studdard, Taylor Hicks, David Cook, Leon Jackson. .. I could go on. Runners-up include Olly Murs, JLS, Stacey Solomon, Rebecca Ferguson and G4 (all very famous in the UK) and of course One Direction (obsession of the moment for teenage girls everywhere). I have shown a more solid and consistent trend than the Proposition so I win this point. Rebuttal IX: "Just look at comments on CRS's videos on YouTube. "Comments on this sort of thing only ever represent the extremes of the spectrum, i. e. those who love and those who loathe. Look at Justin Bieber's videos, it's a case in point. If you look at Stevens's videos, you'll see there are many people who vehemently disagree with you. My opponent has dropped the following arguments:That Fifth Harmony will probably flopThat vocal maturity is irrelevant to voting behaviourThat CRS now has more control over her destiny because she is not shoehorned into a pre-written record dealThat's all my rebuttal done. For my summing up, I'd like to briefly talk about the two Points of Clash (PoCs) in this debate. PoC1: From a talent perspective, have the Proposition shown that Tate Stevens is objectively inferior to CRS? No, they have not. The Proposition have essentially said "I prefer CRS, and so do my friends, therefore we're right". This completely ignores the fact that, being a 12 year old themselves, they and their friends are in the perfect target market for CRS. My opponent has self-righteously assumed that everyone thinks like them and some great injustice has occurred but they also stubbornly refuse to recognise that her opinion is clearly a minority one. That's black and white, it's in the results. They've also banged on and on about Stevens only winning because he got the sympathy vote but this is an assumption and she has not provided any evidence which fulfils her burden of proof. Opposition win this point. PoC2: Have the Opposition shown that this situation will work out for the best for CRS? Yes, we have. We've demonstrated that CRS will make her vast millions and have her spectacular success when she is older and can cope with the pressures and demands of fame more easily. We've also shown that she's on course to be able to mould a record deal which suits her, unlike Stevens's position. Proposition did not refute this point so Opposition takes this point of clash. Summary of this debate, and why you should vote ConWhat we have demonstrated throughout this debate is that the Proposition's views are based on their own demographic and don't represent a national trend. The Proposition had the burden of proof to demonstrate that more people prefer CRS to Stevens, and the Proposition has failed to meet this. Conversely, Opposition have shown every step of the way that the Proposition's arguments are meritless, as they are only applicable to certain people. My opponent is, essentially, a CRS supporter who is being a bit of a sore loser. They have provided no concrete reason for this decision to be overturned, have dropped all of my arguments about how this situation will serve CRS for the best, and haven't actually proven or even demonstrated that Stevens only won due to the sympathy vote, which is the cornerstone of their argument. With all that, the winner of this debate is crystal clear. The team which has provided reasoning behind the decision and drawn back the curtains on the Proposition's web of assumptions is ours.