General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOn Charlie Kirk's debates.
"Why didn't you ever debate the professors, anyone your age... someone with a developed frontal lobe? ...
"Why didn't you ever debate the professors, anyone your age... someone with a developed frontal lobe? Charlie Kirk debated to win. He did not debate to seek truth."
— Mindciteð¥ (@mindcite.bsky.social) 2025-09-27T17:28:14.026Z

no_hypocrisy
(53,192 posts)of logical fallacies which veered away from the original premises of the arguments, creating chaos and impossibility to respond.
NJCher
(41,541 posts)And then there were the kind employed by Rush Limbaugh, who didnt employ logic or reasoning but who depended on ridicule and demonizing.
He couldnt do any in depth argumentation because, gasp, he might have to read.
no_hypocrisy
(53,192 posts)and the class Gish Gallop (machine-gun delivery of issues in a clump).
NJCher
(41,541 posts)Delivered in a loud, boisterous style that did not in any way facilitate the give and take of productive exchange.
Orrex
(66,090 posts)He argues more or less exactly like a creationist. He was a big fan of the Gish gallop, equivocation, false equivalence, non-representative sample, invoking questionable authorities, etc.
And, just like fundamentalists confronted with vile passages from their bible, Kirk (and his fanbois) insist that these direct quotes are "taken out of context."
Iggo
(49,238 posts)applegrove
(128,383 posts)He was a public figure. He didn't deserve to die. No innocent should. He chose to be a public figure. He also chose to be a Republican which has a long standing policy of messing up the Healthcare options for 44,000 people a year resulting in their death. And they are innocents too. This stuff is damned important to the future lives of those college kids Kirk used to argue with. Their lives hang in the balance too because not all those university kids Kirk debated will be rich enough, or employed enough, to get healthcare in the anti-democracy the GOP/MAGA want to construct.
You know who else we are not supposed to talk about after they die? Schoolchildren who get shot. And Charlie Kirk had opinions and argued with college kids about how he was okay with this tradeoff so long as the second amendment is 'protected'. Those mass murders of children and others brutalizes the country and teaches Americans to accept atrocities. Charlie Kirk was interested in schooling children in heartlessness by suggesting children see public executions.
A lot of innocent people are dead. I care about the living because there is still a chance to help them. How long would you have me cease and desist from discussing politics, as politics was and as politics is, after Charlie Kirk was assasinated? A month? A year? Just a blanket ban on ever discussing Kirk and his political legacy?
Your team is narrowing the terms of what we can discuss. Your perspective is shrinking. You are driven by fear and you have been fooled into misplacing what you should be afraid of. Pretty soon you will be fully robotic appendages to MAGA with no will of your own. And we on the Democratic side will be open and loving of our neighbours and fully human and we will talk freely.
Iggo
(49,238 posts)Here. Let me expand a little.
Hes dead. Hes gone. Im glad hes gone. (Not how he left. Thats a different issue.)
And I cant wait til you guys quit pumping him up so hell finally fade away into obscurity.
(Your team? Really? Get some fucking sleep, man. )
mr715
(2,007 posts)This is an ex-Kirk. This Kirk is no longer amongst the living. This is a former Kirk. It has shuffled off its mortal coil.
Crunchy Frog
(28,068 posts)Conjuay
(2,702 posts)He's dead, an as much as the right seems to think otherwise I'm certain he will remain that way.
Orrex
(66,090 posts)For purposes of propaganda, he is very much alive. Perhaps moreso now than three weeks ago.
SunImp
(2,532 posts)His youtube channel is filled with "Lefty owned", "Dumb purple haired feminist", "Liberal brainrot" videos. I don't think he ever went "I was wrong you've changed my mind on this". Channels like these are just tools for the right to dehumanize & vilify their opponents.
Orrex
(66,090 posts)The media's rush to canonize him is nauseating, and I get the sick feeling that similar adoration will be heaped on Trump when his years-overdue stroke finally takes him out.
Johonny
(24,775 posts)Don't make him debate even more educated people.
Kirk won when he could bluster and lie through a subject, which looks great on TicToc unless you know things. But often he didn't even survive with that. The dude had no substance, nothing worth saying, and won't be remembered because he isn't actually interesting. Move on.
sir pball
(5,149 posts)Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Orrex
(66,090 posts)Swede
(37,411 posts)
JanMichael
(25,725 posts)Students younger than him owned him.
mr715
(2,007 posts)Because they were smart, prepared, and the video wasn't edited by Kirk's team.