First, I review the context for the need of new deliberative models, specifically agonistic deliberative models, for public discourse and for use in training students for public discourse. I then highlight five specific points that I trouble and enrich, principally through the work of Giroux, Arendt, Biesta, and Duarte. While I agree that there is great value in Lo's description of the agonistic deliberative model, I advocate for what Biesta would call a weaker model of deliberation, one that sets the conditions for transformative education but one that does not act as an instrument for it. [This article is in response to "Empowering Young People through Conflict and Conciliation: Attending to the Political and Agonism in Democratic Education." To view this article, see EJ1140087.]