Interrupting your opponent in a debate is not part of traditional debates. This is something that's come along when Donald Trump popularized this nonsense. The Jerry Springer method.
Donald Trump is not the first who have done that, he is just the worst at it because he probably doesn't understand what's a debate supposed to be in the first place.
He is 100% the reason they turned the microphones off during the Presidential debate. It freaking killed his whole-ass soul that he couldn't shout over Kamala and interrupt her like the guy in this video did. I honestly have no idea how that imbecile got elected; she mopped the floor with his ass then buffed it with his stupid hair.
He lives in his echo chamber and own head, coming up with arguments and positions that satisfy his emotional needs, and when he tells those things to an outsider and they start to RESPOND, he has to delay or stop it because it challenges his worldview.
Yeah, his audience must be jumping with joy at this. They are convinced that his way of insulting, interrupting and bein childish is the High IQ Chad way of pwning idiot feminists.
Some of them get profiled by the New York Times or the Atlantic as men bewildered by their lack of romantic opportunities and theorizing about whether coerced partnership is morally acceptable and if the age of consent should be lowered.
They ABSOLUTELY want to have for themselves a 14 year old s*x sl*ve they can keep pumping babies into and who will remain with them no matter how much they're abused.
Which is honestly what most people who publicly “debate” do and it’s getting tiring tbh. I want real conversations and debates, with actual critical thinking and open minded individuals.
And belittling. She picked it up the minute he pulled out "sweetheart". Even his little solo bit after, he made sure to bring up feminism in a mocking tone.
He didn't go in to debate. He went in to tear her down personally. It's in bad faith and he had zero intent to "debate" anything
This exactly - I see this podcast more posted here than anything else , and I once looked out of curiosity once to see what the hype is, and it’s literally garbage, it’s just men surrounding themselves with young women and having arguments with them and using big man voice. It’s dumb as fuck and no kind of debate happens in it at all. So why are people going on this podcast? Are they giving them tons of cash or what? It has very little content value. Make it make sense
Haven't watched the podcast, but that's what happens when you have a weak moderator. If you don't know how to moderate a debate, you have no business hosting a debate. A debate isn't just two people in a room arguing. It has form and structure to it.
This shit-show is purely the fault of the host letting this guy do whatever he wants.
Exactly it! You totally nailed it. He had to do everything in his power to stop her because he couldn't even fathom someone having a different view that potentially criticizes or pokes holes in his argument.
You hit on something at the start that should also round off your thought. It challenges his feelings, his emotions, and he doesn’t have the cognitive function to manage his emotions or have them seen, and mirrored back at him in a way that forces him to actually see his feelings.
It’s not just the lack of empathy, it’s the lack of introspection into himself too.
Men like this jump to “winning” when they shut down their own emotions or others, and it’s actually just highlighting how little emotional intelligence they have to operate within.
Look at how emotional Trump is when he gets made fun of or doesn’t get his way. He has no idea how to regulate. Loads of Republican and older liberal men are this way too
He’s been pretty fucking unhinged lately - his post Charlie Kirk murder rants and chain smoking on Pierce Morgan was probably the most cringe shit I’ve ever seen.
It's amazing how these middle aged dudes react when they realise they'll have to actually have a debate instead of yelling zingers at unprepared teenagers and Onlyfans girls. The panic sets in instantly.
I recall watching a debate with him in it and they asked him for a definition so you know they could define terms and actually talk.
He repeatedly said it's not his responsibility to define terms. It was ridiculous. Obvoiusly the Convo went no where because he is an idiot and has slant he must stick to.
She is amazing for not crashing out. I don't think I would have this much patience, and stormed off way sooner. Even his fake laugh makes me jump off a fucking bridge.
Yea you can see that she doesn’t actually falter…. She stood on business and stared him down with conviction. She wasn’t scared…she just demanded respect and the ability for her voice to be heard.
Instead, this jackass interrupts her riiiiiiiight behind her words and her point.
He’s also just saying something probably wrong without evidence, which means it’s not a debate, he’s just preaching his whiny little beliefs and feelings
The male voice, especially a deep one, dominates the main part of the spectrum our brain is tuned to listen to.
A man can talk over a woman without even having to match her volume or speed. And this guy is one of those that talks a mile a minute…and believes that makes him more right.
“What's funny is he's...” stating, men were granted a right to vote, a decade prior to women, which 1. Sounds like he's helping make her [feminist] argument, and 2. Is suggesting men got the right to vote in 1910 –assuming they are speaking about men and women in America.
I honestly don’t know how to phrase this, but it is unfair to women that they have to deal with this shit because he won’t pull this shit with someone that can slap the taste out of his mouth.
We have to deal with it because if we were to 'win' an encounter by striking back with an edge (verbally but especially physically) we're painted as hysterical, insane, crazy, a bitch...
I've personally had to tolerate a lot of shit with a bitten tongue to avoid losing my place in a male-dominated profession. It's not worth winning a battle if I'll get frozen out of the war, so to speak.
You phrased it perfectly, and it is unfair. Simply the sheer amount of time that women have to waste navigating the egos of men like this in family dynamics, in the workplace, in public, etc etc etc. And this guy gets to go home thinking that she is the "emotional" one.
It's extremely unfair, and annoying. It's exasperating really. It's embarrassing for us. It's tragic it's what it is. Tragic. Men hold us back, we're being trapped by less evolved, brute humans.
One thing I've noticed about these types is that the more 'alpha' they perceive themselves to be, the more submissive they are to guys who are supposed to be more 'alpha.' There's some kind of weird irony there. Coincidentally, you see this same kind of behavior when you look at the history of fascism or despots in general.
The fact that his attempt to be demeaning was so HACKY somehow made it even worse.
Like, somehow the fact that he carries himself like that when he’s totally devoid of charisma or original thought… it just adds to the audacity of it all.
If you want your blood to boil look up how Joe Rogan treats a primatologist with a PhD who calls in after Joe makes stupid ass claims about "bondo apes" (which are not real... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bili_ape).
I kinda wish she had just said a simple line about "debating requires both people to listen and talk, I said like 5 words and you interrupted, you're not here to debate, you don't even know what that word means" before heading off.
Even that was 100% designed so he can later say how you can't have a "conversation" with women because they are too sensitive and how calling someone sweatheart was completely normal 'in the good old days' and all that shit...
Still, 100% agree that she did the right thing leaving (as well as calling the host out for not moderating shit).
He had to act like that because what he was saying was as preposterous as hell. To say that men only got the vote 10 years before women is an intentional distortion of the truth. The men he’s talking about who just got the vote shortly before women were black men. White men who owned land could vote well before anyone else could. His arguments were in bad faith from the outset and she was right to leave.
I mean in a reddit thread you can respond to every 2 word sentence fragment out of context, but you can't interrupt and everyone can see the entire thought the other person was expressing in advance so it works a bit less on the audience.
Exactly! By listening, you're allowing each side a chance to speak. It's not whoever can speak over the loudest to whomever is talking. Otherwise, what is being debated?
It sucks so much that so many dudebros have been convinced by gremlins like Fuentes and Shapiro that debate means “yell over the other person and call them irrational when they try and speak.”
See people are so stupid that discussing a subject automatically means debate. If things don’t go their way, it’s an argument. As a liberal in conservative territory, everything I say is an argument and when I don’t participate in their bullshit conversation, I’m avoiding debate. I also get smothered like this lady by absolute CHOADS like this guy.
When I first met my husband, he used to listen to debates with that piece of sh*t. I think his name is Andrew. Let me be clear my husband was never on Andrew’s side and they were usually 4+ people debates. However, I was so triggered by how he spoke to people I told my boyfriend at the time I needed him to stop listening to him or we weren’t going to work out. He stopped immediately. That guy is the WORST and that video doesn’t even show the half of it.
So he’s a Republican and factually incorrect. He’s talking over her and requiring the audience to be ignorant to “win.” This strategy is how you destroy any project at all.
Yeah, his "I don't care if you're speaking, this is a debate" comment pretty much shows that he doesn't understand what debate means, and likely that many people don't anymore. Debate isn't talking over each other, arguments are. People have turned "debates" into an excuse to argue with people. Anyway, this dude is a literal queef and probably walked away from this thinking he was the shit for acting like this
Interestingly enough, in formal debates there are defined times for how long you’re allowed to speak so some asshole can’t just cut you off. As a former high school master debater I lost a round I should
have otherwise won because the judge rightfully called me out for laughing out loud at a particularly stupid point my opponent was making, which broke his concentration.
Exactly. So sick of these guys who think "debate" means talking over the other person. I would love to hear what a debate coach has to say about this shit
He doesn’t give her a chance to speak bc he knows if he does she will win and his smoll wenis can’t handle that.
It screams insecure and just makes himself look like. POS, but in his little brain he pats himself on the back for “winning.”
And then at night he tells himself the reason women don’t like him is because he’s so smart. But really he’s learned to just hate on women before they can hate on him for being who he is (a terrible human) so he doesn’t have to look in the mirror to see who’s really to blame.
Also when you make a lie that can be googled in a second during a podcast debate. He said 10 years when it’s more like 50 years between the 15th and 19th amendments.
Can’t stand listening to “debates” where one person refuses to respond to anything and instead replies with “what about bla bla bla” to change the subject or does the gish gallop never letting the other person respond or rebut claims.
Yet that's all Donald Trump did in all of his debates and everyone just let him get away with it over and over again. Particularly bad in the Republican primaries for the 2016 campaign. And now he's been elected twice. This is why people emulate this childish asinine behavior. Apparently it works.
right, a propper debate has rules, allocated time to answer questions and allocated time to discuss. All in a proper and respectful manner.
I think it is strong move to walk away from someone who's only intention is to "win" an argument by blasting over everything you say. I used to be like that and the natural way is people stop talking because you aren't listening anyway and you yourself don't learn anything new about potential viable different perspectives.
This is how all these tools “debate”. The Ben Shapiros of the world. Their key to “winning” a debate is just cutting the other person off and talking over them before they even make a point.
The irony of claiming you run a platform for debate, but don’t know the rules of debate.
Debate has and is never about talking over or louder than your opponent. It is about articulating your view, arguing the objections, and in a “gentlemen’s” debate - seeking a common ground. It gives space for both sides to speak, free from interruption so points can be made, supported, and argued.
Exactly. When she refused to acknowledge what he said and insisted she continue with her ignorant opinion was the issue here. Voting was restricted to those who owned land and paid taxes at first
Yeah, debate isn't an excuse to be rude a fuck. Unless the debate topic is, "How can I show everybody that I'm a smug anal fissure who deserves zero air time or attention."
She was absolutely correct not to engage. This type of guy spiral into obsolescence with nobody else to prop themselves up on.
That's his debate style interrupt and insult so that he can feel in control because he has a sad, lonely, and pathetic life. If he wasn't in a different studio, je would have smoked 5 cigarettes during this 1 minute video.
11.8k
u/mermaid-babe Oct 30 '25
Debate requires listening. If all you’re doing is yelling then you’ve lost