Expressed awillingnessto changeone’s mindIdentifieddiversions andworked to refocusthe exchange onthe relevantreasonsPresented andresponded to anargument theirconversationpartner nevermade (hollowman)Displayed anability to listen byaccuratelysummarizing theclaims of theirconversationpartnerDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons by tryingto provoke emotionalresponses from theirconversation partnerAttempted tomanipulate byoffering evidencethat he or sheknew was wrongor distorted*Expressedappreciationfor skepticismor dissentingviewSpoke toconversationpartner as ifthey were achild in need ofeducationClaim defendeddid not follow fromthe reasonsand/or evidenceoffered to supportthe claimDivertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons byexpressingmoral outragePre-emptivelyacknowledgeddissentingviewDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons byattacking thecharacter of theconversationpartnerPrevented conversationpartner from offeringarguments orresponses toarguments byinterrupting and/ordominating theconversationWorked to identifyand introduce thebest reasons tosupport theirconversationpartner’s claimsAttempted toendconversation byexpressing adesire to avoidconflictDivertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons bychanging thesubjectPresented andresponded to adistorted versionof conversationpartner’sargument (strawman)Presented andresponded to theweakest of theconversationpartner’sarguments (weakman)Asked forclarification orconfirmation tomake sureargument wasaccuratelyunderstoodCommunicatedwith theaudience,rather than theirconversationpartnerAdmittedevidenceand/orreasoning wasmistakenReasons and/orevidenceoffered was noteven plausiblytrueRaisedquestions aboutspecific claimsoffered byconversationpartnerOfferedreasons thatare notaccessible to allcitizens within aDemocracyAdopted a newposition inresponse tocriticism (i.e.,changed one’smind)Expressed awillingnessto changeone’s mindIdentifieddiversions andworked to refocusthe exchange onthe relevantreasonsPresented andresponded to anargument theirconversationpartner nevermade (hollowman)Displayed anability to listen byaccuratelysummarizing theclaims of theirconversationpartnerDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons by tryingto provoke emotionalresponses from theirconversation partnerAttempted tomanipulate byoffering evidencethat he or sheknew was wrongor distorted*Expressedappreciationfor skepticismor dissentingviewSpoke toconversationpartner as ifthey were achild in need ofeducationClaim defendeddid not follow fromthe reasonsand/or evidenceoffered to supportthe claimDivertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons byexpressingmoral outragePre-emptivelyacknowledgeddissentingviewDiverted attentionfrom the quality ofthe reasons byattacking thecharacter of theconversationpartnerPrevented conversationpartner from offeringarguments orresponses toarguments byinterrupting and/ordominating theconversationWorked to identifyand introduce thebest reasons tosupport theirconversationpartner’s claimsAttempted toendconversation byexpressing adesire to avoidconflictDivertedattention fromthe quality ofthe reasons bychanging thesubjectPresented andresponded to adistorted versionof conversationpartner’sargument (strawman)Presented andresponded to theweakest of theconversationpartner’sarguments (weakman)Asked forclarification orconfirmation tomake sureargument wasaccuratelyunderstoodCommunicatedwith theaudience,rather than theirconversationpartnerAdmittedevidenceand/orreasoning wasmistakenReasons and/orevidenceoffered was noteven plausiblytrueRaisedquestions aboutspecific claimsoffered byconversationpartnerOfferedreasons thatare notaccessible to allcitizens within aDemocracyAdopted a newposition inresponse tocriticism (i.e.,changed one’smind)

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