Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ben Shapiro is not against the state. Shapiro, like every sane person, understands the existence of the state is necessary to protect our freedoms. Shapiro believes in keeping that states size to a minimum.
Shapiro is very intelligent and he’s excellent at debate. Cortez, or anyone would be an idiot to debate him. In debate, one can still win even if they are wrong. You just have to make the other person look more wrong. Shapiro is excellent at staying on the attack and whoever he is debating will constantly be on the defense.
I agree with some of Shapiro’s positions, but not all of them. Shapiro is conservative, not libertarian, not an anarchist, not whatever else.
At times Shapiro agrees with libertarian policies and he'll say so. Agree with you saying he wants minimal government.
However being for or against the state isn't all or nothing like you are implying. Or like the poster I responded to who incorrectly said "he just excuses the state no matter what." One can be against the state and not be an anarchist.
Last edited by Loveshiscountry; 08-08-2018 at 11:59 PM..
He is a lawyer, and debates issues for a living, of course he would come off better. The question is silly.
Christopher Hitchens would have destroyed Ben in a debate. Presenting ideas better doesn't mean they are automatically better. If I were Ben, I would have offered to sit down with her for a genuine exchange of ideas or a conversation rather than framing it as a debate to try to demonstrate idea supremacy.
Challenging a novice to compete in an activity that you spend every day of your entire life doing is pretty weak if you ask me.
He is a lawyer, and debates issues for a living, of course he would come off better. The question is silly.
Christopher Hitchens would have destroyed Ben in a debate. Presenting ideas better doesn't mean they are automatically better. If I were Ben, I would have offered to sit down with her for a genuine exchange of ideas or a conversation rather than framing it as a debate to try to demonstrate idea supremacy.
Challenging a novice to compete in an activity that you spend every day of your entire life doing is pretty weak if you ask me.
If she’s a novice is she really fit for Congress ?
He is a lawyer, and debates issues for a living, of course he would come off better. The question is silly.
Christopher Hitchens would have destroyed Ben in a debate. Presenting ideas better doesn't mean they are automatically better. If I were Ben, I would have offered to sit down with her for a genuine exchange of ideas or a conversation rather than framing it as a debate to try to demonstrate idea supremacy.
Challenging a novice to compete in an activity that you spend every day of your entire life doing is pretty weak if you ask me.
A Marxist is always going to loose an economic debate. Facts don't care about emotions.
If she’s a novice is she really fit for Congress ?
Considering some of the people we have in office right now, I am not sure if anything disqualifies her.
I honestly don't know that much about her except she is a democratic socialist who didn't do well articulating her message in the two interviews I have seen. I don't live in NY and I am not a democratic socialist, so she isn't really of much interest to me.
I don't dislike Ben, I just think the challenge is bush league unless she attacked him or something. If she attacked him, I would change my mind and say she should put up or shut up.
A Marxist is always going to loose an economic debate. Facts don't care about emotions.
Debates are about who makes the most compelling argument, a good debater can take any position in an argument have a shot of winning regardless of truth. Ben Shapiro could take the Marxist position in a debate and he would destroy you. At the end, he would probably tell you that facts don't care about your emotions just to rub it in for good measure
Debates are about who makes the most compelling argument, a good debater can take any position in an argument have a shot of winning regardless of truth. Ben Shapiro could take the Marxist position in a debate and he would destroy you.
No he wouldn't. You just made that up because I made you look silly for posting rubbish
Quote:
Originally Posted by cofor
At the end, he would probably tell you that facts don't care about your emotions just to rub it in for good measure
Here is the way he would respond and it is very close to the way I feel about it. He didn't rip on insurance companies nearly as much as I would have, but his basic reasons for supporting a competitive health care system are mine as well.
As for the bailout thing, I don't think that is any better.
You also dont understand this thread isn't about Trump. It's about that stupid woman and her horrible policies.
I still find it incredibly sad that there are people who feel that seeing that everyone has affordable access to healthcare is a stupid policy. Most of the advanced world disagree's with you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
