The phrase "argue simultaneously" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing situations where multiple parties present their arguments at the same time or in parallel.
Example: "During the debate, the candidates were able to argue simultaneously, making it difficult for the audience to follow their points."
Alternatives: "debate concurrently" or "contend at the same time".
Nothing undid former BNP leader, Nick Griffin, faster than his mesmerising car-crash appearance on Question Time, where he appeared to argue simultaneously to keep Britain British, while being unable to speak English properly.
One can argue simultaneously for the madness and wisdom of crowds, so it's not yet clear how crowds will compare at picking the best startups.
He is now in the awkward position of arguing, simultaneously, that the Fed needs to restrain the economy; that the economy is zooming mainly because of the rising stock market; and that the Fed is not targeting stock prices.
In other words, Green seems to be arguing simultaneously that the will must be and may not be free.
For example, Memarian seeks to rebut our analysis of the Green Movement's decline by arguing simultaneously that the Ashura protests on December 27 , 2009showed the Green Movement's strength and that the February 11th anniversary of the Islamic Republic's founding "was never meant to be the peak of the people's protests".
Slavery shapes the history of the loyalist diaspora but, Jasanoff argues, was simultaneously transformed by the "spirit of 1783" as the Abolitionist movement in Britain developed in response to defeat in America.
Can women simultaneously argue for their ability to work as hard as men and suggest that no one should work that hard?
I asked him how he could simultaneously argue that the bank should stop lending to corrupt countries and become more involved in Iraq, which now trails only Haiti in some rankings of the most corrupt countries on earth.
It seems hard to simultaneously argue that Scotland can be better off alone and that it needs to depend on a foreign central bank to come to its rescue in times of trouble.
You can campaign, as the Tea Party has done, on promises never to increase the nation's debt limit, but you cannot simultaneously argue that Mr Obama has been reckless with the nation's finances, while also propelling the most reckless act of all – the day (theoretically next Thursday) when the government will have to delay, or prioritise, the payment of US Treasury bills.
In the book, I simultaneously argue that the corrupting influence of partisanship (on both the religious left and religious right) helps explain at least some of institutional Christianity's post-1960s decline, and that Christians cannot simply be apolitical and leave partisan controversies alone, which would seem like the obvious way to avoid such corruption entirely.
