Sentences with phrase «side of the argument won»

Not exact matches

You may not get to some of the evidence that is perhaps crucial to winning your side of the argument.

The conservative politician who can listen to members of the other political coalition like Reagan did, and who can learn to respond to the arguments of the other side (as opposed to just posturing for the amusement of their own side), won't just win over those who currently think of themselves as swing - voters.

In my book — a bully is a bully is a bully and I will NEVER be won over to ANY side of an argument by being bullied.

He is the king of winning the one sided argument, because woe to him who would criticize the word of the lord.

Persons such as yourself who have a similar predisposition of course will side with someone ho supports your view and pretend they are objective but honesty is never as important as winning the argument when it comes to discrediting Christ.

It's all these non-specific over simplifications of the other side's view points, that make arguments seem easily won.

I can comprehend your side of the argument, titles per year is in question because he has had over a decade of not winning the title to lower the statistic you want.

During the Premier League win over Stoke City on Saturday, Walcott came up with more ammunition for both sides of the argument.

of course no team wants to lose but I can guarantee you that the reaction by the Chelski fans after today's results are nowhere near what would have occurred if we shit the bed on opening day... the difference is they have tasted EPL success on more than one occasion recently, they have won the Champions League and they have done it with 3 different managers in the last 12 years with a similar, if not smaller, wage bill than us... in comparison, we have been experiencing our own personal Groundhog Day with nothing to show for it but a few silvery trinkets that would barely wet the appetite of a world - class club... so it's time for Wenger to stop gloating over our week one escape act and make some substantial moves before this window closes or I fear that things will take a horrible turn when the inevitable happens... living on a knife's edge is no way to go through a full season of football and regardless of what side of the argument you fall on, you could feel high levels of toxicity in the air and that was friggin week one... I would much rather someone tried their best and failed, than took half - measures and hoped for the best

But, on the other side of the argument is the fact that he certainly has nothing else to prove in Serie A after winning the title in all three seasons he has been at Juventus.

our managers stubborness and reluctance to spend seems to have our fans split right down the middle... i genuinely believe its not the fact that he thinks the squad is good enough its more that hes trying to prove that you do nt need to buy success and by god if it takes him 10 years for this bunch to mature enough to do it hel keep us suffering so he can turn and say «told ya so» to fergie, rafa, hughes, abramovich, etc.the problem is by the time this happens theyl have won titles by spending the question is are all you fans on the other side of the argument willing to wait that long and watch cesc, RvP, arshavin, cliche etc go elsewhere for momentos of their careers.in the time since our last league triumph (also last serious challenge) the team that has won the league most has invested in berbatov, nani, evra, vidic, carrick, hargreaves, anderson, tevez to name a few....

I understand that you're doing what you can to win people to your side of the argument.

The test now for both sides is which argument over the current two - year cycle will win: The Cuomo branded «Getting Things Done» in Albany versus the ideal of liberals holding power in the Trump era.

Gov. Cuomo's side of the Women's Equality Party argument has won yet another appellate court ruling.

I thought that he was on the Dr Rosedale side of the argument but you appear to have won him round.

The two are on opposite sides of the argument with Iron's Brundage eventually winning the vote and securing America's involvement in the event.

By the end of the novel, which side of the argument has «won» — Nature or Nurture?

The debate is won or lost based on the number of listeners we convert to our side of the argument.

Even though it's easier to walk away, the worth is in winning the fight; you do want to see what's in store on the other side of the argument.

The art of persuasion is of course necessary to winning any argument, but make sure you have real, physical, incontrovertible evidence on your side, not just clever words.

If there is one comment that makes a strong argument on a particular point and many comments that argue the opposite side of that point with weak technical or purely emotional arguments who wins?

We consoled ourselves with the certainty that we would win the arguments because opponents of AGW have all the facts on our side.

What the contrarians need is not to win rationally the argument for / against man - made global warming (this has been resolved scientifically) but plant doubt in the public and politicians, because inaction and the status quo is on the side of the traditional energy industry.

Debaters don't have to be on the «correct» side of the argument to win the debate.

If we are confronted with an aggressive attorney on the other side of the case we will shield our client from confrontations with that attorney, increase our own «continuum of force» as necessary and be very tactical on getting your case before a mediator or simply control the litigation by moving tactically faster than the other attorney with arguments that are compelling to win your case.

You need not predict which of them would win and which would lose, but you should analyze them as thoroughly as you can, giving the best arguments for both sides.

In somewhat the same vein, put up a hand if you're in favour of a new rule of lawyer's professional conduct which states that lawyers acting for the winning side in a law suit are allowed to comment on the merits of the result for the media — print, electronic, and otherwise — only if the lawyers concede, on the record, that the decision is wrong on the facts and the law, and that they were surprised (nay, astonished, flabbergasted, etc) that any of their arguments were accepted by the judge.