Hi Sup Forums

Hi Sup Forums

Tomorrow I will be partaking in a debate at my school.

>inb4 underage b&, last year of school, I'm 18

Now the topic being discussed is "Trump's cabinet is unfit for its purpose".

I've been able to get a good defence going and I've thought of all possible arguments that could be made - that his cabinet is full of people with no political experience (I'll compare it to Reagan's cabinet which was similar, and argue the point that Reaganomics worked), about how James Mattis, Steve Mnuchin and Wilbur Ross have the experience they need for their job, and maybe bring up how Rex Tillerson's ties with Russia is a good thing.

Here's where the problem lies. I don't know how to defend Betsy DeVos.

I would greatly appreciate any help on how to defend her, and if there are any other points I could bring up.

Also I only have 3 minutes allocated for my speech.

Thanks Sup Forums!

bump

Easy. Explain that Betsy Devon fits the purpose of fulfilling the conservatives goals with respect to education. That goal is radically different than "more of the same traditional school structure" and thus she is similarly qualified in ways to meet those goals.
Essentially the goal is a privatization (and state regulated) education system. So it makes sense to have someone who is t qualified as being a teacher or superintendent, but rather someone who has experience in the private education system which she does.

Sweet, never thought about it that way. Thanks user.

Anyone who didn't support Hillary is a rural and suburban retard and your life is pretty much worthless because you don't live in the real world.

fuck off leaf

Reminder that only suburban and rural retards voted Trump. The American people chose Clinton

>18
>still in highschool
I hope you already have a job. Otherwise your life was over before it began.

In NZ we have 13 years of HS, not 12

You should bang a sheep in front of the class.

I just looked it up.
>primary and secondary schools - from 5 to 19 years of age (school is compulsory from 6 to 16 years of age)
Thats odd.

I plan on doing that while I make the speech to add extra emphasis

She's against common core. That's enough to défend her

Bait but i will bite.
Define purpose.
Republicans HATE the dept of education. She is going to rek the fucker.

nah mate the cunts full of shit no one is 18 at the start of the year unless he got held back

Op is 17

fuck drump and fuck white people

you got me

I'll take your word for it. But regardless the education system in both our countries and the rest of the world is fucked. We're treat like children and taught useless shit that isn't practical for adult life at all until we're 17/18. Many teenagers are fucked, and the destruction of the family unit doesn't help.

Sometimes you need to take a small hit and agree Betsy Devos is not the most fit person to take on such a role.

>Rex Tillerson's ties with Russia is a good thing

Don't bother with that. Instead say that Exxon is pretty much its own nation state that has bigger intelligence and foreign departments than most countries and Tillerson has essentially already been a president and a SoS for the last 10 years. His background is perfect.

Don't defend her- you have 3 minutes- sing glories of Trump and Tillerson and Mattis and Ben Carson

Her brother Eric Prince is the founder of Blackwater now Academi. They educate people of all religions, politics, and cultures world wide. She married into the Amway fortune which also run all types of nutrition and marketing classes around the globe. I think with her connections and family business experience, she more than qualified to train our kids into healthy big guys and smart hired guns with a lot of loyalty.

I'm tired of this. Sessions wasn't a racist and Bannon wasn't an antisemite. These lies are so obvious to be insulting.

If someone gave me a link to Devos eating kittens, I would not click it. These people lied to their audience twice. I would not spend 0.1 calories to read their next opinion on the next appointment.

She has advocated for private/charter school waivers which would allow federal funds instead of going to shitty public school could help a parent afford to send their kid to a private school.

Private and charter schools are shown to produce kids with higher test scores and more advanced reading and math levels.
She is making libs mad by cucking the power of the Department of Education and giving more power to parents.

OP you little underaged shitstain you better use my point.

>I'm 18

POST DICK FAGGOT

Successful business woman, philanthropist, huge advocate for charter schools which has proven time and time again to significantly increase academic results in black ghettos.

>be Kraut
>4 x NEINs
PURE POTTERY

The department of education has become nothing more than an institution that controls the narrative of education in the United States. They do this through deciding where to allocate funding through standardized testing. Over the years the standardized testing has grown and grown to the point that now teachers spend most of their time teaching towards the standardized test, they have virtually no freedom and this is also a very bad environment for students to learn in. For example my mom used to be a choir teacher, she retired 6 years ago, at the end of her career she was required by her principal to teach math and English lessons. In choir class.

Liberals bitch endlessly about these standardized tests. They have completely ruined education in the US. They manage what teachers are supposed to be doing down to the minute and limit students, they pull funds away from schools that are already struggling, they are awful. Even liberals, who enjoy the monopoly on public education, will tell you that these tests are the devil.

Guess who doesn't have to participate in these tests? Private schools. Guess who wants to reign in the dept of education? Devos. The number one thing that needs to be done to fix education in the US is getting rid of these tests and devos plans on doing that. Liberals know what it would take to get rid of these tests but also don't have the morals or the balls to do it as they know the sacrifice their dogma would suffer.

You could also throw in how common core is Satan in the classroom and actually counter productive.

how convenient that everyone who posts that he's "in high school" is conveniently 18

lmao

...

...

To Rex Tillerson, mention how a good relationship with Russia means more stability for the whole world. Mention that all major wars since WW2 were proxy wars between Russia and the US.

You forgot Scott Pruitt but that's beside the point. Every single cabinet member who appears bad is not there to dismantle their department brick by brick. You may disagree with doing so, however, it is a brilliant cabinet for the job. Take Rick perry, 4 years ago he wanted to get rid of the department of Energy, now he heads it.

'There to'

Why the fuck are ozzies debating American politics?? Sort your own fucking shit about. Debate about abbos it something.

>3 minutes

You don't have time to go through every single pick. Use your time to dismantle their argument in advance by defining the 'purpose' of his cabinet as being to dismantle or significantly restructure the departments they are appointed to. In the cases of Mathis, Perry, Ross etc. mention as an aside that they actually /do/ have the experience necessary.

Not sure if you're still there user, but i did.

Trump's tax plan isn't Reaganomics. Trump's America is empty of businesses and he's making things easier for businesses in order to lure them back. Reagan's America had businesses, he just thought easing the tax burden would make those businesses more liquid and benefit the economy as a whole.

NZ =/= aussie

Sweet, I shall do that. Thanks user.

I'm not saying that Trump's plan is similar to Reaganomics, I probably shouldn't have mentioned it. I meant that Trump and Reagan had about the same amount of people without political experience in their cabinets, and if Reagan's cabinet proved to do a good job, there is no reason why the argument that "his cabinet isn't political enough" would be valid

>inb4 underage b&, last year of school, I'm 18

Figured you meant college, but since you mention it, your political opinions are meaningless until you turn 28, have a child within wedlock or purchase property.

If your opponent tryies to appeal to sentiments just banish the argument with facts that evoques other sentiments. For example:
>Trump is racist
That's not what polls said. Trump was elected thanks women and blacks, which made the difference to make him president. That means they are actually concerned about their situation in schools, poverty... so on.

Call your opponents kikes and commies, remember to insert the fourteen words in there somewhere as well.

Make sure to greentext here later so the mouthbreathers have something to circlejerk about.