le liberal strawman face

>>131042274

It's all in good fun.

The routine is pretty hackneyed though;

>Invite on liberal retard
>Make mouth-agape-pretending-not-to-understand face so Liberal keeps trying to explain his point and of course just makes himself look dumber and dumber

Anyway, Libcucks have had shows like this for decades. It doesn't hurt anyone.

Also, the Jon Stewart thing was infuriating - Stewart was a disingenuous mong and intellectual coward, but all he had to do to impress the morons that make up cable news viewers was adopt the mannerism of someone winning a debate.

It was Goronchev tier.

Anyway, Tucker's schtick will get old unless he once in awhile brings on someone not retarded and feigns losing.

File: 1497852181634.gif (1022KB, 500x639px) Image search: [Google]

1022KB, 500x639px

>>131042274
>dicking
All Jon Stewart was crack sarcastic strawman jokes to change the subject, and Tucker is not a comedian so he didn't have rofl ecks dee funny jokes to counter him.

File: lollloolol.jpg (2MB, 630x8612px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 630x8612px

you write like a jew. we see you here all the time, seeking validating for your victim complexes.
we know you. Your lies and tricks are no good here. This place is full of jewish parasites that hate other jews like you. They sniff you out like corpse dogs.

>>131042274
>low-hanging fruit liberal caricature
that's the majority of them bro
their party is broken into pieces.

>>131042575
>Anyway, Libcucks have had shows like this for decades
They haven't really. You'll notice that a lot of the liberals that Tucker brings on are never on any other major networks. I don't know of any major left-leaning pundit show that makes it a habit of bringing on retarded conservatives. That kind of intellectual dishonesty doesn't fly in the liberal demographic (other types of intellectual dishonesty maybe, just not that kind).

Jon Stewart wasn't debating them. He was illustrating how stupid and divisive the show was.

>>131042274
Isn't that what Jon Stewart did for entertainment?

File: 1495179142670.gif (3MB, 460x373px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 460x373px

>>131042274
The fact that you're so pissed off about it means he's doing his job great.

>>131044466
He's not triggered at all you stupid snek. It's valid criticism of a formula that people seem to gobble up

>>131042274
more often than not his guest is not some strawman he picked up off the street. he very often has leading members of the liberal party or liberal movements on.

The liberal movement is just that batshit crazy right now.

Aren't all leftist arguments low hanging fruit?

>>131044466
This guy's gets it

>Some video from 2006
Tucker was born last year you lying kike

>>131044226

Completely untrue.

And shows like The Daily Show or Michael Moore's old show didn't even have talking heads from recognized institutions. They'd frequently resort to Man-On-The-Street mockery.

Just see all the networks that will give idiots like David Duke airtime so they can fuck over Trump.

Sometimes it backfires - See Richard Spencer - The heavily edited Atlantic tape made it seem like they were booking a retarded Nazi, but he ended up being...Not a retarded Nazi.

Also - See Alex Jones on NBC just a few days ago.

>That kind of intellectual dishonesty doesn't fly in the liberal demographic (other types of intellectual dishonesty maybe, just not that kind).

It's less prevelant now than it was in the 90's and early 2000's, but I don't think thats owing to any kind of intellectual rigour - It's just that they don't like giving "platforms" to these people and prefer closed system circle jerks.

>Stewart wasn't debating

Precisely. He was being a hypocrite and trying to deflect criticism by running and hiding behind "it's just a joke bro". He was also unwittingly putting forward the concept that echo-chambers are good because they keep the social peace.

He's a retard.

>>131044226
>Intellectual dishonesty
>Doesnt fly for liberals
>Were too sophisticated to make fun of dumb outliers
Kys

Dumb outliers is literally the reason you try to ban rifles.

>>131044226
Also David duke and Richard Spencer. Both also cut off after they said some bad stuff out of context and before they could say anything that really makes you think

>>131044328

Jon Stewart's argument is that he did it for comedy.

Jon Stewart also wants his political opinions to be taken seriously, except for when he doesn't.

This methodolog applied to the right makes the left cry about "trolls".

>>131044599

It's only semi-valid. OP either is ignorant of the facts or omits by choice that many of the guests DO have positions of prominence in leftist institutions.

>>131045166
Yeah bringing Alex Jones on multiple times and taking him seriously was worse than anything Tucker has ever done.

Alex Jones is a joke, but that doesnt mean you cant listen for fun.

It's called television you shitwit

>stop using our tactics against us! Reeeeeeeeeee!

>>131042274
change the chanel dick turd

That Jon Stewart video is just like
>ugh you're terrible
>because like ugh you're bad I don't have to explain myself I'll just mock you and try to manipulate the social dynamic with my body language

>>131042274
>Every 'debate' on his show is either him going against a low-hanging fruit liberal caricature
The fact that he can easily find one every single time is a powerful message in its own right. The left IS a low hanging fruit caricature.

>>131042274

he's not a sophist. he makes real arguments based on evidence. you're right about low-hanging fruit though.