Unlike the Toulmin and Rogerian methods where one side is argued over another the Middle Ground argument mediates between two

Unlike the Toulmin and Rogerian methods where one side is argued over another, the Middle Ground argument mediates between two sides of an issue hopefully arriving at a compromise solution between two positions.
Please include both answers in one initial post with extra space between them.
Middle Ground Discussion:
For this discussion, choose an issue that you wrote about previously in this course (either your Toulmin or Rogerian essay).
Let the class know your previous claim and briefly how you proved this claim in your essay.
After this brief review discussion, discuss how you would have approached this particular topic if you were to write a Middle Ground argument, instead of a Toulmin or Rogerian argument.
Would you have adjusted your claim?
If so, what sort of adjustment would you need?
Would you have to find additional sources about your topic in order to prove this new claim? Is a middle ground solution a more practical solution to your chosen issue?
In your responses to your classmates on the Middle Ground discussion, let your classmate know which argument appears to be stronger: the original claim or the new middle ground claim.
Please make sure to explain why.
If you disagree with both claims, that’s fine – let your classmate know why you disagree in a bias-free manner.
Concluding Remarks: Secondly, during this course, you have read quite a few arguments, critiqued some of these arguments, and written essays using various methods of argumentation.
Take a moment to consider your future courses at APUS and/or your current/future career field.
How can you incorporate what you have learned into your career or education?