Originally posted by Surtur
Bingo, TYT have all been getting worse and worse over the years. I think Trump winning in November finally broke them completely. Ana is also completely toxic and dumb.
Don't know who Ana is, very rarely watch TYT.
Cenk's personality is grating and he seems to have a temper and very easy to upset.
But the reason I dislike him is because he denies the Armenian genocide. That alone makes it impossible for me to take seriously pretty much anything he says.
Originally posted by BackFire
Don't know who Ana is, very rarely watch TYT.Cenk's personality is grating and he seems to have a temper and very easy to upset.
But the reason I dislike him is because he denies the Armenian genocide. That alone makes it impossible for me to take seriously pretty much anything he says.
Lol yeah if you have a spare 3 minutes watch this video of how TYT react when the armenian thing is mentioned by an audience member at a panel, it is comedy. You can tell they are upset that they chose a minority to ask a question and he didn't just parrot back what they wanted to hear:
Going in to this, my own experience watching them meant that I was somewhat predisposed to siding with Shapiro over Cenk. The former is a better speaker, more well-rounded, and he speaks to certain things I agree with (some I don't, mind you). Cenk... I used to love TYT, but in the last few years, they've jumped the shark big time. Still, I tried to keep an open mind as I sat and watched this all the way through...
-Healthcare: Both men got their point across, but I don't know if either of them has the right point in the first place. I don't know what will fix America's healthcare/social security/disability system, but it DOES need fixing.
-The Tax system... Cenk (briefly) had the high ground and then had to go and be a dick about it. Both men had good points though, I felt, and there was plenty of back and forth.
The overriding feeling I had watching the debate was that my thinking was more in-line with Cenk's position (at least in the vaguest terms), but his delivery was pretty poor, and that he wasn't as prepared for the debate as Shapiro was. Getting up on his soapbox didn't help his case either.
At the end, I think the actual solution to their arguments wasn't on either side, but somewhere in between. And to that, I don't think either actually won the debate.
Yea, watched again and he was as shit as I remember. I even kept close track of the claims made on both sides. The only "stats" that Cenk cited were relating to how well medicare/medicare for all/govt funded health insurance polls with the public. Ben's only claims that are remotely objective/verifiable were that Cali recently turned down Medicare for all cause it would double their debt, and that the only reason we have employer based health insurance in the first place was in response to wage and price controls placed in the aftermath of WW2 (I haven't looked any of this up to fact check whether in fact it is true, including Cenk's poll stats). Other than that it was basically the two of them explaining their own subjective logic for why they support their side. And Shapiro did a better job, easily. IMO. But I still disagree with him. Cause universal healthcare wasn't really given a proper defense.
Originally posted by MythLordWhich he really didn't do, honestly.
I don't think Cenk really won healthcare. I mean, I personally agree with him that universal healthcare should be a thing... but his arguments were shot down.Cenk's primary debating tactic is yelling, interrupting and pulling double standards.
I really don't recall consistent yelling or interrupting throughout the debate, tbh. Maybe a couple times, but to say that was his primary tactic seems inaccurate to me. And yeah, Cenk definitely did some retarded shit in the debate such as the USA chant, insulting the audience, and the "Google it" thing he said a couple times, but overall I think he held his own pretty damn well.
To be fair, he didn't pull it off nearly as much as usual, no. But he still did it fairly frequently. His general arguments don't stand to scrutiny and instead of reinforcing them, which he can do as I agree with some of his positions, he just opts to do stupid sh!t.
He did better against Shapiro than I expected, yeah, though Ben still shot him down conclusively throughout most of the debate IMHO.
Originally posted by MythLord
To be fair, he didn't pull it off nearly as much as usual, no. But he still did it fairly frequently. His general arguments don't stand to scrutiny and instead of reinforcing them, which he can do as I agree with some of his positions, he just opts to do stupid sh!t.He did better against Shapiro than I expected, yeah, though Ben still shot him down conclusively throughout most of the debate IMHO.
Exactly, and Cenk was at times acting in a way that made you wonder...is that Cenk or is it Steven Crowder pretending to be Cenk?
But yeah, 11 to 2 now. Looks like Cenk got Shapiro'ed.
Ben talks too fast, almost out of control. Someone needs to coach him on how to debate/talk better.
You can't just throw word salads at people and talk like an auctioneer and expect your points to stick.
And Ben failed majorly on several points such as economy and healthcare. But Ben won this, no problem.