Divertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons bychanging thesubjectDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons byattacking thecharacter of theconversationpartnerDivertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons byexpressingmoral outragePresented andresponded to theweakest of theconversationpartner’sarguments (weakman)Communicatedwith theaudience,rather than theirconversationpartnerReasons and/orevidenceoffered was noteven plausiblytrueExpressedappreciationfor skepticismor dissentingviewPre-emptivelyacknowledgeddissentingviewPrevented conversationpartner from offeringarguments orresponses toarguments byinterrupting and/ordominating theconversationIdentifieddiversions andworked to refocusthe exchange onthe relevantreasonsPresented andresponded to adistorted versionof conversationpartner’sargument (strawman)Asked forclarification orconfirmation tomake sureargument wasaccuratelyunderstoodRaisedquestions aboutspecific claimsoffered byconversationpartnerExpressed awillingnessto changeone’s mindClaim defendeddid not follow fromthe reasonsand/or evidenceoffered to supportthe claimDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons by tryingto provoke emotionalresponses from theirconversation partnerAdmittedevidenceand/orreasoning wasmistakenDisplayed anability to listen byaccuratelysummarizing theclaims of theirconversationpartnerSpoke toconversationpartner as ifthey were achild in need ofeducationOfferedreasons thatare notaccessible to allcitizens within aDemocracyAttempted tomanipulate byoffering evidencethat he or sheknew was wrongor distorted*Worked to identifyand introduce thebest reasons tosupport theirconversationpartner’s claimsAttempted toendconversation byexpressing adesire to avoidconflictAdopted a newposition inresponse tocriticism (i.e.,changed one’smind)Presented andresponded to anargument theirconversationpartner nevermade (hollowman)Divertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons bychanging thesubjectDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons byattacking thecharacter of theconversationpartnerDivertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons byexpressingmoral outragePresented andresponded to theweakest of theconversationpartner’sarguments (weakman)Communicatedwith theaudience,rather than theirconversationpartnerReasons and/orevidenceoffered was noteven plausiblytrueExpressedappreciationfor skepticismor dissentingviewPre-emptivelyacknowledgeddissentingviewPrevented conversationpartner from offeringarguments orresponses toarguments byinterrupting and/ordominating theconversationIdentifieddiversions andworked to refocusthe exchange onthe relevantreasonsPresented andresponded to adistorted versionof conversationpartner’sargument (strawman)Asked forclarification orconfirmation tomake sureargument wasaccuratelyunderstoodRaisedquestions aboutspecific claimsoffered byconversationpartnerExpressed awillingnessto changeone’s mindClaim defendeddid not follow fromthe reasonsand/or evidenceoffered to supportthe claimDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons by tryingto provoke emotionalresponses from theirconversation partnerAdmittedevidenceand/orreasoning wasmistakenDisplayed anability to listen byaccuratelysummarizing theclaims of theirconversationpartnerSpoke toconversationpartner as ifthey were achild in need ofeducationOfferedreasons thatare notaccessible to allcitizens within aDemocracyAttempted tomanipulate byoffering evidencethat he or sheknew was wrongor distorted*Worked to identifyand introduce thebest reasons tosupport theirconversationpartner’s claimsAttempted toendconversation byexpressing adesire to avoidconflictAdopted a newposition inresponse tocriticism (i.e.,changed one’smind)Presented andresponded to anargument theirconversationpartner nevermade (hollowman)

Presidential Debate Disagreement Bingo - Call List

(Print) Use this randomly generated list as your call list when playing the game. There is no need to say the BINGO column name. Place some kind of mark (like an X, a checkmark, a dot, tally mark, etc) on each cell as you announce it, to keep track. You can also cut out each item, place them in a bag and pull words from the bag.


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
  1. Diverted attention from the quality of the reasons by changing the subject
  2. Diverted attention from the quality of the reasons by attacking the character of the conversation partner
  3. Diverted attention from the quality of the reasons by expressing moral outrage
  4. Presented and responded to the weakest of the conversation partner’s arguments (weak man)
  5. Communicated with the audience, rather than their conversation partner
  6. Reasons and/or evidence offered was not even plausibly true
  7. Expressed appreciation for skepticism or dissenting view
  8. Pre-emptively acknowledged dissenting view
  9. Prevented conversation partner from offering arguments or responses to arguments by interrupting and/or dominating the conversation
  10. Identified diversions and worked to refocus the exchange on the relevant reasons
  11. Presented and responded to a distorted version of conversation partner’s argument (straw man)
  12. Asked for clarification or confirmation to make sure argument was accurately understood
  13. Raised questions about specific claims offered by conversation partner
  14. Expressed a willingness to change one’s mind
  15. Claim defended did not follow from the reasons and/or evidence offered to support the claim
  16. Diverted attention from the quality of the reasons by trying to provoke emotional responses from their conversation partner
  17. Admitted evidence and/or reasoning was mistaken
  18. Displayed an ability to listen by accurately summarizing the claims of their conversation partner
  19. Spoke to conversation partner as if they were a child in need of education
  20. Offered reasons that are not accessible to all citizens within a Democracy
  21. Attempted to manipulate by offering evidence that he or she knew was wrong or distorted*
  22. Worked to identify and introduce the best reasons to support their conversation partner’s claims
  23. Attempted to end conversation by expressing a desire to avoid conflict
  24. Adopted a new position in response to criticism (i.e., changed one’s mind)
  25. Presented and responded to an argument their conversation partner never made (hollow man)