Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (democratic socialist) wins NY primary

[Zombie]

This whole thing is absurd. Political candidates don't generally engage in bad faith debates with partisan pundits.

Let's be real for a second, public debates are much more performance than they are substance. I'm sure with his experience Shapiro would probably 'win' a public debate with Ocasio Cortez. Not on the strength of his ideas, of course because they are terrible, but he's quite the gifted sophist, which tends to play well in those kinds of environments. There's really no upside for her to stoop (quite literally) to his level.

 

[Archie Moses]

He might talk circles around people and spew facts but that doesn't mean it's good info.

Using poor logic from the other side against them doesnt suddenly make that for logic.

That tweet is a great example. He misconstrued words and change the conversation. If you use common logical fallacies then I don't trust your info. But if you use those and use lots of info you can probably debate well and get people to like your info, even though it's poor.

What about her tweet though? I mean, she didn't even respond to Shapiro and made herself look like a victim while making a dumb, irrelevant comparison.

 

[Siro]

I don't think I've ever seen a single good debate between well know public figures. I've watched dozens. Maybe hundreds if you count debates between pop-atheists and religious apologists.

 

[Archie Moses]

He doesn't seem to say at all what @Jazzta claimed he did, but maybe he said that stuff at some other time. I'm looking forward to seeing jazzta's evidence.

The thing with Shapiro is so many people paint him to be something he's not, or twist his words, or label him alt-right or use fear mongering tactics and propaganda against him. I mean, he plays that game to a certain degree with the daily caller, but at the end of the day, Shapiro is pretty level headed. The controversial topics he discusses he at least shows evidence of why he believes that way whether you agree with his rhetoric or not.

I used to think a lot of ****** things about Tommy Robinson because if things I was reading online or hearing. I thought he was a white supremacist and the Brittish version of the alt, alt right. Then I started watching his own videos and listening to what he says, his opinions on things, and his agenda. I've also heard him distant himself from beliefs he had when he was younger and explain why in a way I find convincing and sincere, he felt that way and why he changed. Imo, Tommy Robinson isn't a bad guy. I disagree with some of what he says, but it's bizarre to see his treatment. There's this one interview he does online where the news host is just a jerk to him, but he keeps his cool. The one annoying thing about him is he can talk over just about anyone.

This is a pretty interesting conversation where two people who think something about others, from what they see online, sit down and have a conversation. Just think if more people in politics did this instead of ******** on others, the world would be a better place.

 

[Archie Moses]

I don't think I've ever seen a single good debate between well know public figures. I've watched dozens. Maybe hundreds if you count debates between pop-atheists and religious apologists.

Debates between atheists and religious folk are the most cringy, pointless debates of all.

 

[Archie Moses]

He doesn’t want to help her by debating, so he had bad intentions?

Bro. You wanna talk false logic?C’mon.

1) You make this seem like a bad thing. In what debate from opposing parties do they want to help each other? Calling it bad intentions makes it seem worse though, and that is intentionally misleading.

2) She said conservatives are afraid to debate her. A conservative challenged her to a debate, while offering to donate to her political campaign. (Bad intentions tho). She then responded by comparing it to catcalling.

Soooo...when you challenge people, then respond to challengers by saying it’s similar to catcalling (which she only said bc Shapiro is a male), you come off looking dumb.

3) She doesn’t have to debate Shapiro. She shouldn’t debate him, tbh. But her response shows her immaturity and lack of wisdom.

He's parroting and mimicking what he thinks he should say because of what he thinks he knows about Shapiro imo.

This is something I'm working on not doing as much myself.

 

[Ron Mexico]

He doesn’t want to help her by debating, so he had bad intentions?

Bro. You wanna talk false logic?C’mon.

1) You make this seem like a bad thing. In what debate from opposing parties do they want to help each other? Calling it bad intentions makes it seem worse though, and that is intentionally misleading.

2) She said conservatives are afraid to debate her. A conservative challenged her to a debate, while offering to donate to her political campaign. (Bad intentions tho). She then responded by comparing it to catcalling.

Soooo...when you challenge people, then respond to challengers by saying it’s similar to catcalling (which she only said bc Shapiro is a male), you come off looking dumb.

3) She doesn’t have to debate Shapiro. She shouldn’t debate him, tbh. But her response shows her immaturity and lack of wisdom.

As I stated I was basing it on the tweets if she said people are afraid to debate her then I change my stance on her tweet. But I already started that.

Combining all debated with this instance Is changing the conversation. No, all debates are not bad intentions. Him wanting to debate her right now means he wants to prove her wrong and make her look bad. That's pretty safe assumption and naive to think otherwise.

I think his response does immaturity and lack of wisdom.

He changed the argument to make himself look better.

But if she really said conservatives were afraid to debate her and then had she gave that response to him offering to debate him that's a bad response from her. But how response was also silly, immature, and poor logic.

So most likely if everything being said is true they both look dumb and immature.

 

[Siro]

Debates between atheists and religious folk are the most cringy, pointless debates of all.

If god is all good, then why does evil exist?

Zzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Archie Moses]

If god is all good, then why does evil exist?

Zzzzzzzzzzz

The devil, obviously.

 

[Ron Mexico]

What about her tweet though? I mean, she didn't even respond to Shapiro and made herself look like a victim while making a dumb, irrelevant comparison.

I agree, if she did state that conservatives were afraid to debate her then have that response to a challenge that is dumb. That's why I said based on these tweets and not on other context. But his response was still terrible.

This makes both of them look bad.

 

[Ron Mexico]

He's parroting and mimicking what he thinks he should say because of what he thinks he knows about Shapiro imo.

This is something I'm working on not doing as much myself.

I know nothing about Shapiro. Like I said I don't know who he is besides from you on here. I don't know what others opinions are of him before I've never heard anyone discussing him.

I don't know his stance on anything. I only assume he is conservative based on this conversation. Which means I probably agree with 1/2 of what he says. I'm a fairly conservative person.

So my opinions are not parroted from anyone since I don't know what they are.

You seem to be very defensive of him and jumping to conclusions.

 

[Archie Moses]

Combining all debated with this instance Is changing the conversation. No, all debates are not bad intentions. Him wanting to debate her right now means he wants to prove her wrong and make her look bad. That's pretty safe assumption and naive to think otherwise.

I think Shapiro wants to know answers to some of the things she says. If she gave Shapiro legitimate answers, she'd have nothing to worry about. If she didn't, then obviously she's making herself look bad. Shapiro would capitalize on it too and would be stupid not to.

She says some things I think a lot of people want clarified.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ecking-alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-media-blitz/

 

[Ron Mexico]

I don't think I've ever seen a single good debate between well know public figures. I've watched dozens. Maybe hundreds if you count debates between pop-atheists and religious apologists.

I've seen some, I enjoy debates though when things stay polite. Hannity debated Michael Moore in Orem once and it was pretty entertaining.

 

[Siro]

I've seen some, I enjoy debates though when things stay polite. Hannity debated Michael Moore in Orem once and it was pretty entertaining.

I watched a debate between Hannity and Rocky Anderson here in SLC. Was worthless.

 

[Ron Mexico]

I watched a debate between Hannity and Rocky Anderson here in SLC. Was worthless.

I was mildly hopeful for that one but it was terrible. It makes a debate awful when you have 2 people that dont really have facts on what they are debating.

Debates are much more interesting between experts in a field of expertise.

 

[Archie Moses]

I know nothing about Shapiro. Like I said I don't know who he is besides from you on here. I don't know what others opinions are of him before I've never heard anyone discussing him.

I don't know his stance on anything. I only assume he is conservative based on this conversation. Which means I probably agree with 1/2 of what he says. I'm a fairly conservative person.

So my opinions are not parroted from anyone since I don't know what they are.

You seem to be very defensive of him and jumping to conclusions.

I mean, you did say he was owned by her and based it off of gobbledygook.

Plus, a lot of responses from members on Jazzfanz about Shapiro have been pretty negative, so I have a hard time believing you're in that big of a vacuum when it comes to him.

He has the second biggest pod cast on iTunes and has millions of followers. I read the news daily and see him come up a lot on various different news agencies. I'd consider you to be an informed dude who at least somewhat follows politics, so it's weird think you really don't know anything about him. I guess, I should give you the benefit of the doubt and apologize for assuming your intentions. My bad.

 

[Ron Mexico]

I think Shapiro wants to know answers to some of the things she says. If she gave Shapiro legitimate answers, she'd have nothing to worry about. If she didn't, then obviously she's making herself look bad. Shapiro would capitalize on it too and would be stupid not to.

She says some things I think a lot of people want clarified.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ecking-alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-media-blitz/

Reading through that and some quick google searches I generally disagree with a lot of things she stands for. But she isnt someone I care about since she has very little to do with stuff here.

Maybe that is some of the reasons he wants to debate with her but I am sure he still wants to prove her wrong. She does owe her constituents answers and clarification. Politicians should be very open and not leave things to guessing and do things behind closed doors(one of the reasons I strongly dislike the SLC mayor). But she definitely does not owe him anything. He lives in LA right?

 

[Archie Moses]

This wasn't Shapiro's best debate, but I enjoyed it. I don't mind TYTs, but Cenk wasn't the best to step up to Shapiro.

 

[Ron Mexico]

I mean, you did say he was owned by her and based it off of gobbledygook.

Plus, a lot of responses from members on Jazzfanz about Shapiro have been pretty negative, so I have a hard time believing you're in that big of a vacuum when it comes to him.

He has the second biggest pod cast on iTunes and has millions of followers. I read the news daily and see him come up a lot on various different news agencies. I'd consider you to be an informed dude who at least somewhat follows politics, so it's weird think you really don't know anything about him. I guess, I should give you the benefit of the doubt and apologize for assuming your intentions. My bad.

I based my opinion on those tweets. The only other thing I have seen from him is the video you posted of the debate. As far as she goes I have seen the headlines in the news about her and gave them a quick glance over but she is of little interest to me. So I have not followed her story much.


I dont really follow people of that nature regardless of which side they are on. I tend to stick to news, journals, and real information. From what I can tell he someone that talks and gives his opinions on stuff. I have little to no interest in that, especially with politics. I have my own opinions, ill stick with news and info for that. He might be mentioned in the news but that wouldnt likely to be an article I would read and his stuff does not pop up for me. That is more likely that you click on stuff about him so you see lots about him. Or at the least find him interesting so you would notice his name where I would glaze over it.

Maybe ill listen to him some more if he is providing good information or news.

 

[Ron Mexico]

This wasn't Shapiro's best debate, but I enjoyed it. I don't mind TYTs, but Cenk wasn't the best to step up to Shapiro.

Ill watch some of this when I am at a computer.