From the beginning, he launched an offensive and took the initiative

From the beginning of the debate, he launched an offensive to keep himself in an active position. After giving the other party a deterrent attack, he gradually lured the other party to debate around his own topic, refuted the other party with sufficient facts in the debate, and put the other party in a difficult situation. There are three main types of preemption. One is that when the other party "starts first" but doesn't, you take the lead, so that the other party is unprepared, disorganized, lose psychological balance, and lose. The second situation is to make full preparations in advance. When the other party doesn't expect it, they will take out conclusive evidence and attack the other party. They will go straight to the point so that the other party has no breathing space and can only accept your point of view. The third is to predict the enemy's theory and refute it first. That is to say, refute the other party's possible views in advance, which can not only make the listener form a preconceived impression, but also put the other party in a passive position.

Of course, preemption is not an impromptu speech. We must know ourselves and the other and be fully prepared before we can hit the mark. In addition, the language of the debate must be reasonable, and the facts used must be checked repeatedly to be correct. Otherwise, it can provide a basis for the other party to "attack later" and make itself passive. Thirdly, we must seize the opportunity and not delay the fight. "Once the tiger hesitates and loses the opportunity to attack, it's not as brave as a bee." That's the truth.