- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/17/26 at 4:43 pm to Harry Caray
Chuck is no moderate, lol. In almost every voting record you will find Schumer is at least in the top quarter of all senators on liberal issues. He is not pro-2nd Amendment, he is not pro-life, he is a big proponent of the Affordable Care Act, etc. He has always been on the liberal wing of the party.
This post was edited on 2/17/26 at 4:51 pm
Posted on 2/17/26 at 4:46 pm to liquid rabbit
quote:Man: Look, I CAME HERE FOR AN ARGUMENT, I'm not going to just stand...!!
Pro: If I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
Con: Yes, but that's not just saying "no, it isn't."
Pro: Yes, it is.
Con: No, it isn't.
Mr. Barnard: OH, oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse.
Man: Oh, I see, well, that explains it.
Mr. Barnard: Ah yes, you want room 12A, Just along the corridor.
Man: Oh, Thank you very much. Sorry.
Mr. Barnard: Not at all.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 4:56 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
quote:
far right
Could you define that term ... precisely, please?
I keep seeing the term "far right" associated with German Socialists from the 1930's.
But obviously Socialists are leftists. Can you clear up your meaning?
I've already explained this. When I (quickly) researched Andrew Wilson, this is the term that kept coming up.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 4:58 pm to themetalreb
To learn and grow, challenge one’s / own thinking, to understand, broaden perspective.
To win ‘spirit’ is this social media click, echo chamber, pitted rivalry, us vs them mindset that I think achieves exactly the opposite.
To win ‘spirit’ is this social media click, echo chamber, pitted rivalry, us vs them mindset that I think achieves exactly the opposite.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 5:03 pm to themetalreb
quote:
What is the point of a debate?
To best your opponent!
Posted on 2/17/26 at 5:09 pm to themetalreb
If it's a good argument, or debate, people learn from each other, and possibly build on each other to reach new ideas, or new solutions. But that's really rare. So it's usually about ego, trying to "win", insult or tear down the opponent, etc.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 5:14 pm to themetalreb
quote:
I’ve been watching Andrew Wilson on YouTube lately….he’s a far right podcaster and he’s always in these raging debates with liberals.
I can’t help but laugh at people who believe that anyone who isn’t a liberal is “far-right.”
Posted on 2/17/26 at 6:02 pm to Darth_Vader
Aren’t they?
Posted on 2/17/26 at 6:05 pm to themetalreb
It’s entertainment. It’s all BS. Arguing for clicks.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 6:26 pm to cssamerican
quote:Trying to pin down a universally agreed definition of “far right” or “far left” is like trying to nail Jello to the wall. Everyone thinks they know what it means until you ask for a clean, academic definition and suddenly it’s semantic gymnastics.
Yeah, for some reason normal common sense thought is labeled “far right”, I’m not sure if people understand what “far right” should actually mean.
So instead of arguing labels, I’ll just list what he has actually said or aligned himself with and you can decide where that falls. He used to go by “Big Papa Fascist.” He has openly argued for Christian nationalist governance. He proposes a hierarchical social structure rooted in religious authority. He positions himself against egalitarian assumptions. He consistently frames democracy as decaying and in need of fundamentally different ordering principles.
None of that is being listed to dispute or criticize his positions, only to clarify what they are before we argue about what box they fit in.
If that cluster of positions is just normal common sense, then fine. But historically and politically, that bundle of ideas sits well to the right of mainstream American conservatism, which is why people use the term. You can debate whether “far right” is the perfect label, but pretending the description comes from nowhere is a little absurd.
If someone doesn’t like the label, the way to disprove it isn’t to demand a dictionary definition. It’s to explain which of those positions are middle of the road in modern conservative ideology.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 6:36 pm to shutterspeed
quote:For the internet bloodsports version of debate, this is basically the whole point. It’s entertainment. It’s spectacle with arguments instead of gloves. Asking for the point is like watching boxing and demanding to know why two grown men are punching each other.
What is the point of a debate?
To best your opponent!
The point isn’t consensus or policy drafting. It’s competition.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 7:53 pm to themetalreb
quote:
He always thinks he wins the debates. His opponent always disagrees.
There is no debate, all these podcasters are virtue signaling to their side with pre-packaged talking points, which are meant to create more engagement to sell more ads. It's like TV on motherfricking steroids because of the engagement algos and the on-hand availability of content and the immediate feedback the content creators receive on platforms like Youtube and TikTok.
IMO 90% of these pod-casters/influencers are LARPers that don't believe anything they are saying and it's all about the Benjamins.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 8:37 pm to chryso
quote:
Please name some far left extremist podcasters.
Will Menaker, Felix Biederman, Matt Christman, and Amber A'Lee Frost - Chapo Trap House
Matthew Sitman and Sam Adler - Know Your Enemy
Robert Evans - Behind the Bastards
JT Chapman, Hakim, and Yugopnik - The Deprogram
All of these podcasters describe themselves as various forms of Leftist (some anarchists, some communists, some general Marxists, some Democratic Socialists), advocate for the end of capitalism, and disagree with the fundamental ideas of classical Liberalism.
This post was edited on 2/17/26 at 8:41 pm
Posted on 2/17/26 at 9:13 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
You can say what you want about his debate abilities but calling him far right is just straight up retarded.
I misunderstood your post. I thought you were dismissing anything Wilson says because he is "far right."
And he self-describes that way, btw. I heard him do it just today.
Posted on 2/17/26 at 11:27 pm to northshorebamaman
From AI on his position:
The available evidence from Andrew Wilson’s debates, statements, and content indicates that he does not argue for a dictatorship or the enforcement of Christian nationalist ideals as a minority position imposed on an unwilling majority through governmental force. Instead, his positions emphasize working within the existing democratic framework—primarily through voting, elections, and representative government—to achieve cultural and political dominance for Christians. He frames this as Christians legitimately seeking and exercising power when they hold majority influence or elected positions, aligning laws with Christian ethics without subverting constitutional processes.
He’s essentially arguing that Christians should support policies and leaders shaped by Christian values, working within the Constitution just like any other interest group. Critics label this as far-right extremism because the values being promoted are explicitly Christian. The definition of “far-right” has shifted, from describing state-run nationalist or ethnoreligious authoritarianism to describing almost any situation where religious, especially Christian, influence affects secular public life. In this view, secularism is now treated as the neutral center, while only very radical anti-capitalist communism is seen as truly left wing.
Under this definition the United States has been a far right extremist country for the majority of it’s existence,
The available evidence from Andrew Wilson’s debates, statements, and content indicates that he does not argue for a dictatorship or the enforcement of Christian nationalist ideals as a minority position imposed on an unwilling majority through governmental force. Instead, his positions emphasize working within the existing democratic framework—primarily through voting, elections, and representative government—to achieve cultural and political dominance for Christians. He frames this as Christians legitimately seeking and exercising power when they hold majority influence or elected positions, aligning laws with Christian ethics without subverting constitutional processes.
He’s essentially arguing that Christians should support policies and leaders shaped by Christian values, working within the Constitution just like any other interest group. Critics label this as far-right extremism because the values being promoted are explicitly Christian. The definition of “far-right” has shifted, from describing state-run nationalist or ethnoreligious authoritarianism to describing almost any situation where religious, especially Christian, influence affects secular public life. In this view, secularism is now treated as the neutral center, while only very radical anti-capitalist communism is seen as truly left wing.
Under this definition the United States has been a far right extremist country for the majority of it’s existence,
This post was edited on 2/17/26 at 11:31 pm
Posted on 2/17/26 at 11:57 pm to themetalreb
Most debates are pointless, especially political candidate debates. They're about firing up your team's partisans, landing zingers and trying to maneuver your opponent into a gaffe.
William F. Buckley used to sponsor debates where they argued the issues respectfully and in good faith. A bunch of them are on YouTube. LINK
The Buckley Institute continues that format with current events. LINK
William F. Buckley used to sponsor debates where they argued the issues respectfully and in good faith. A bunch of them are on YouTube. LINK
The Buckley Institute continues that format with current events. LINK
Posted on 2/18/26 at 4:19 am to Harry Caray
quote:Yeah Harry. That would be an excellent point were it true.
Nazis weren't socialist despite their party name. Hope this helps.
It isn't, so it's not.
Nazis obviously employed massive social programs, and massive government control to run them.
Sociologists tend to be left-wing academics though.
They could not allow the two political systems associated with the most evil perpetrated on societies in the modern world to both fall on the left side, their side, of a political scale. So they made "minor" changes to assignments.
Posted on 2/18/26 at 5:57 am to 844_Tiger
Yup. When I learned that Hannity and Combs were friends IRL, I stopped watching. All manufactured rage and BS for viewers.
Posted on 2/18/26 at 10:28 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
NC_Tigah
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News