Watch legal debates to pass the bar. No Joke. Look up Irving Younger and buy the book "Represent Yourself Court and Prepare a Winning Case" look at these sites www.shanesnow.com/articles/intellectual-dishonesty/#articles/intellectual-dishonesty-toc debate.potentspeaking.com/7-debate-tactics-you-probably-dont-use-but-should/ Get a list of logical fallacies Use Socratic Method as a strategy good luck
Yes indeedy-do neighbor. Rhetoric destiny is Godstiny but for real. It's like he's powering up, going super sayyjin(?) whatever the fuck before your very eyes. TO BE EVEN MORE. RHETORICALLY. EFFECTIVEEEEEEEEEE!
One thing I have noticed Conservatives do a lot is false equivalency. To be fair, both sides can be seen doing it, but Conservatives do it worse. I guess I can understand why.
For the people that want to know why I can understand, I don't think the left has had a Donald Trump as president or a Marjorie Taylor Greene in congress. I don't know if there are conspiracy theory groups like as crazy as QAnon on the left. This is not me defending the right, but if they are trying to do a what-about-ism, it is kind of hard to equate extreme examples to ones that are nowhere near as extreme.
It's so frustrating how he can't seem to talk about the individual points without immediately jumping to "BUT THE DEMOCRATS DID THE SAME THING AND YOU DIDN'T CONDEMN THEM"
It was his trap card, lmao. "Actually you might have proved Trump did everything I said would be necesary to incite a riot, but you didn't know I had a secret condition: being able to read Trumps mind. Checkmate liberals"
@Totally Serious Person that’s not entirely true. “The two legal prongs that constitute incitement of imminent lawless action are as follows: Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action.” Point number 2 is what we’re talking about here, and it’s a common condition set under most laws and torts of negligence or nuisance. Intention is not a legal requirement, if the effect of such rhetoric can be reasonably foreseen. This means that although your intentions may not be to incite violence, you can still incite violence as your rhetoric can be reasonably interpreted to cause lawless activity. So intention is not a sole requirement like you’ve claimed.
Necessary conditions are just the bare minimum. Meeting all necessary conditions alone doesn't mean anything. This was a nice tactic from destiny but very flawed. I like how so many fucking idiots in the comments fell for it too. How do you watch someone like destiny all day long and not pick up on things like this.
@@Gloomlight it would be bad faith if Destiny didn't believe what he was saying, I don't think that's true. I agree with Destiny's perspective, there's plenty of reasons why data is withheld for purposes without malice.
@@WanderTheNomad online debate will now fall into a battle of shouting “bad faith” at each other for a few months until we find a new phrase to substitute for “wrong and an awful person”
Italian Waffle who gives a fuck about politeness in a debate. Politicians push the idea of politeness because it further reinforces the supposed optics of kindness and well being of others
“The idea that you are impugning me for a hypothetical response i would have to a scenario that never happened based on things you’ve never seen me say” sums up EVERY SINGLE ONE OF ROB’S ARGUMENTS EVER
I was just about to comment this, it perfectly sums up all of robs attacks on destiny and pretty much the left in general. He’s so lost in conspiracy land that he views everything as the “pursuit for the hidden truth” rather than just operating in reality. He’s constantly trying to EXPOSE what you REALLY believe rather than just responding to the arguments given and sticking with the topic at hand.
This guy's rhetoric can be summarized as: "We all know the truth, which is what I want it to be, and if you disagree you're lying. Cause the truth is this."
Rob: “If it walks like a duck then it’s being hunted into extinction by the elites to make us care about environmentalism which is a myth designed to control us. Oh but I’m the conspiracy theorist.” Destiny: “It was actually a man in a goose costume on halloween.” Rob: “There you go again, always shilling for the elites”
And with dems its "so what you have evidence were lying, you still told your followers to question elections like us and only we can do that ever for reasons and RUSSIA!!!!"
@@marktaylor526 LOL, hey don't get me wrong I wish the impeachment passed since that precedent would allow the Republicans to impeach every head figure of the democratic party along with the VP who help pay for legal fees of rioters just only 6 months ago aka finically supporting an insurrection which killed 35 people, ramped up the pandemic, and violated hundreds of thousands of Americans rights to property during an economic disaster. When you have to photoshop dates, you have no case. When you stop a video before a man says support your senators peacefully and patriotically then charge him for tyranny, you still have no case and actually make a case that you should be impeached.
This might have been the most cool and collected I have ever seen destiny against righties, im glad i pressed this when I saw it, right in my FEEEEEEEED
I felt myself lose brain cells when after destiny told him how to argue his point, he came back 5 mins later and yelled at destiny that he wanted the chance to argue his point that exact way. THIS ROB GUY IS A GENIUS!
@@the_guy7305 You could've put a lot more effort into that troll. Example: "Honestly it's so frustrated that destiny constantly does this instead of just admitting when he's wrong." That maybe would've gotten one or two people who fell for it. Yours was just obvious.
Destiny seriously handled Rob well. In a response to an argument, Rob's the type to jump around twenty different topics, casually link something to a conspiracy theory, create five different false equivalencies without taking a breath of air, aggressively throw whattabout arguments at the wall until something sticks shift the discussion away from the original topic, and do it all with day 1 Sean Spicer energy
@@JallyJam Please dude, let's not pretend like being a conservative isn't basically many people's entire identity's on its own. At least we don't wrap ourselves in Biden clothing and blankets and dresses-- we don't worship the ground that Democrats walk on. That's identity politics kicked up to an extreme. Trump IS your party because you build your personal identities around supporting Trump and being a right winger.
Most of the country is "too far gone" because they watch MSM. After dribbling out a baseless conspiracy theory about Russia controlling the election/President/entire country, Rachel Maddow told her viewers that Russia controls the weather and the energy supply. At the time the TV show she hosts was the number one rating news show.
@SoggyShrimp They're a news source equivalent to that Always Sunny meme where he's in front of the conspiracy board. Replace whatever the fuck he's looking at with dem conspiracies. Go watch some of their crackpot ads.
@You wanna go do karate in the garage? nice meme. I refuse to believe you're being serious. It would be physically impossible for someone this stupid to have not somehow Darwin Awarded themselves before they could get to the age where their parents let them go on RUclips unattended.
@You wanna go do karate in the garage? have a good night buddy. Don't play with sharp things, and be careful with bottles that have a skull on top of crossed bones on them.
28:57 "You're asking me, is it possible to incite violence without specifically calling for it, *yes*!" to 41:41 "I think incitement requires intent, I absolutely do." literally flip flopping dude. What a weasel.
No context bait is the new strategy for big youtubers, based on the fact people decide if they'll watch in the first 30 seconds usually. Not a good strategy for nearly an hour of content tho lol. If I have that sort of time, I'm there !
Destiny has demonstrated here a greater emotional control, without depriving us viewers of entertainment, which would be good to learn from if you are looking to improve internet discourse. An impressive use of rhetorical understanding from someone who has been so terrible in the past.
Holy shit "Let me ask you this: Do you think if we have all these major institutions acting a certain way, that it will influence a number of votes?" "No." Well done, impeccable
You know what I love about Destiny, is how consistent he is. No matter what hes talking about and no matter what game he plays he will always find a way to jump from object to object continuisly for over an hour.
Oh oh oh! My turn to say context! Dems were saying fight in court for rights of minorities, and Rudy was saying trial by combat to a bunch of disgruntled voters who brought weapons
TLDW Summary: Destiny unsuccessfully tries to argue that incitement does not first require intention. Stupid, you say? Yes, very. Moronic, you say? Yes, very. Disingenuous and partisan, you say? 100%
Damn, although he was dense as a coconut in the end, after all these turns, he tried his best to argue in good faith and honestly answer some questions. I mean imo he is delusional, but in the end i understood his position and his reasoning, its more sad than funny..
it is really really impressive how destiny is able to listen to Rob constantly change the topic, sometimes completely and sometimes really subtlety, then catch him and reel the conversation back to the original topic. Literally this dude will ramble on for like 5 minutes about something that is barely even connected to what they are talking about (20:00), and other times he will answer a question and halfway through his answer make it so that everything he said was an answer to a different question (38:45)
He's like that loud guy in dilbert. Lol. I think it's a combination of using a mic. Not being in the same room as the guy you are arguing with and with someone who does talk while you are talking.
It never fails. Every time. And I mean EVERY. TIME. A right leaning individual comes in to debate their mic is always messed up. Robs mic is always cutting in and out and he talks super fast you can barely understand a word he’s saying. Super annoying.
Rob is on the wrong side of history and a little too deep into his own agenda, but he's insanely polite, I think this is one of the most cordial debates I've ever seen destiny having. Rob says a lot of stuff I disagree with, but I really can't hate the guy.
Trump supporters: "I love it when Trump triggers the libs. Keep hating him, we owned you snowflakes!" Trump supporters when he loses the election: "There's no way 80 million people voted against him, he was beloved!"
"For me its not about partisanship, but establishment vs not establishment" This is a HUGE red flag, that means he can mould whatever event with whichever people involved to fit his narrative, he can label whatever people he deems "establishment" and dismiss their actions as an evil plan that fits his conspiracies.
@SoggyShrimp I guess I won't take responsibility for you only reading one book in your whole life, but look into some good stuff, you might catch other big words like Hyperbole or Metaphor or Allegory. But no biggie, I understand that Libraries are far away sometimes, it's aight.
Re: 33:55 "'when I hear leftists say how systemically biased and racist the system is and there's nothing that could be done' or that 'riot are the language of the unheard'". The thing is... _it seems_ Trumps audience is more devoted to him than whoever "leftists" audience is devoted to the leftist that said those statements. So, the state of mind of the audience could matter because devotion can make one more easily influenced and called to action.
55:22 Mindyanapolis!!! Being from “Mindyanapolis,” I get a kick every time I hear it pronounce like this. Outside of the state, it is more often pronounced Mindyanapolis than Minneapolis. I don’t correct people or get irritated at all. It is just one of those things that make me chuckle internally. Hehehe
57:13 “I don’t think we have a student loan crisis, personally.” - Destiny Yeeeahhh, that’s an insanely bad, out-of-touch take. There are people who’ve been out of college for 20-30 years who are still paying theirs back. 🤦♂️
55:32 How are you in such a pivoting loop. That you pivot going to the restroom into another talking point? LMAO can't make this stuff up. Political identities are the problem in America
I can't deal with Robs voice, it goes up and down in pitch by a octave on alternating syllables, makes him sound like hes going to bust out into tears.
You can always push any view you want with the following process: 1. Carefully select parts of quotes from people "on the other side" that are consistent with your views when interpreted out of context. 2. Combine the quotes to form a speech that only supports your views. If the people referenced have said something inconsistent, ignore it. 3. Pretend that since the source material references the people "on the other side", your entire speech is representative of the them.
The way this rob guy talks and swings the conversation literally had given me such a migraine. I don't know why I bothered to let myself listen to this for about an hour.
Rob is so heavily emotional about this, he can't get out of his own way. I liked that Destiny literally had to give him the debate format as a template for how to continue (meaning when he said how he could "own" Rob and vice versa). That was hilarious. I was a debater in high school and a debate judge in college, and anytime anyone was as emotional as Rob is, they usually end up being vastly less effective in proving their case. On a separate note, I like the new, "more rhetorically effective" Destiny. He is doing even better, and he was already a kick ass debater before. So Bravo.
Yea, getting emotional in a debate is bad move. You get flustered, and can't have any meaningful argument. To me it shows bad faith, and possible lieing.
Ahh, the classic "gish gallop". Just light a hundred fires and when your opponent can't extinguish them all, declare victory over the burning rubble. Rob, you're everything wrong with humanity.
Saying "we could never prove the intention of a person" when we're talking about courts of law is straight-up false. Intent plays a huge role in our legal system and, in some states, can make or break a death penalty case (e.g. the difference between first-degree murder and second-degree murder is whether or not you intended to murder them beforehand.) Rob totally shit the bed when asked to provide his conditions though. This whole conversation about stakes was completely irrelevant. If we're talking about incitement to violence, you need to demonstrate that 1. A specific person 2. Was placed in imminent danger of bodily harm 3. As an immediate consequence 4. Of a specific statement that I made which could not be reasonably interpreted as anything other than a call to violence. I don't know that intention is a necessary condition for this. I can imagine a public speaker identifying a specific person in a crowd at a speaking engagement and saying things like, "If one of these people hit you, I'd shake their hand! You deserve to be utterly savaged--" and then panicking as a bunch of people dogpile the guy because he didn't believe they'd actually engage in violence. But it would have to be airtight.
To incite is to provoke. Neither definitions require intent, these words refer to consequence of action. For this reason, to hold the position that Trump's words didn't incite rioting would require that Rob holds a standard for incitement that probably far exceeds the average person. I wonder if in his mind, provocation is synonymous with a direct call to action. Anything short of Trump saying to riot specifically would not be sufficient for him. That seems unreasonable to me. :- /
Rob is inconsistent. When asked if someone could insight a riot without explicitly saying go comit violence... he said yes and listed criteria. Then afterwards added a condition that they needed to “intend” it. But that flips his earlier agreement that someone could insight it without explicit saying it because by his metric of proving “intent” they would have to explicit say it for him to believe the intent.
How about communities? Why are people allowed to loot your life away but LETS GET 50 CALS FOR PEOPLE RIOTING ABOUT THE ELECTIONS BUT NOT OVER A RACE. If the shiny house on the hill is more important than the houses at the bottom of the hill then what's the purpose of having the shiny house on top of the hill?
Ah yes, Donald Trump the anti-establishment figurehead. The same Donald Trump who’s also a son of a billionaire, who’s been a New York real estate mogul for decades, who’s been connected with powerful people since childhood, who always got special treatment from those powerful and influential, and who closely worked with establishment Republicans his entire presidency. Truly a hero of the common man. The detachment from reality of conservatives is unreal
In Rob's world you can't protest fascism without allowing fascists to protest democracy. For Rob both are the same thing! For Rob both are bad or both are good.
While I agree with some of what Rob says, he made the mistake of lowering the bar for the criteria for "incitement". The bar is, necessarily, high for this. His criteria require knowing the mental state (or mind) of the person making the statement and the hearer, which we cannot know. This is why specific and explicit statements are/should be required for "incitement." This then draws a better (although not perfect) link between intent and the utterances. The understanding of the statement by the hearer can be inferred by the actions they take. Rob was the undoing of his own argument.
This is really interesting and makes total sense. Conservatives can't actually talk about their own side. They can't talk about what happened. They can't stay on topic. They HAVE TO constantly pivot to talking about the left or the Democrats because they have no way to defend their own beliefs and actions. It absolutely makes perfect sense that this would be the way the conservatives debate since this is what they always do. They have no arguments of their own, the only thing they have is attacking Democrats and the left. This was a really good example of what trying to keep a conservative on topic does. It flusters them and they flounder around for 20 minutes desperately trying to get you to talk about the left. It makes them look really bad because they don't have an answer for anything you're saying and can't stay on topic. I think this is a really important lesson to take from this debate. When trying to debate conservatives, make sure to hold their feet to the fire and keep them on topic. Don't let them change the subject and do "whataboutism"s.
the conservative sounds like snot from family guy, or booger from revenge of the nerds. either works. lmfao cant unpicture him debating Destiny now. lol not a bad thing, just. cant unsee it.
Destiny continues to practice being more rhetorically effective in 2021. Thoughts and advice?
Destiny destroyed Destiny in this debate.
@Bruce Derek dark syde phil
Interested to see how it plays out. So far so good.
Destiny continues to practice bad faith double-speak.
I think you've done very well sir
Watch legal debates to pass the bar. No Joke. Look up Irving Younger and buy the book "Represent Yourself Court and Prepare a Winning Case"
look at these sites
www.shanesnow.com/articles/intellectual-dishonesty/#articles/intellectual-dishonesty-toc
debate.potentspeaking.com/7-debate-tactics-you-probably-dont-use-but-should/
Get a list of logical fallacies
Use Socratic Method as a strategy
good luck
Caring about rhetoric destiny is by far my favourite so far. Making Rob actually answer a question is truly impressive.
Yes indeedy-do neighbor. Rhetoric destiny is Godstiny but for real. It's like he's powering up, going super sayyjin(?) whatever the fuck before your very eyes. TO BE EVEN MORE. RHETORICALLY. EFFECTIVEEEEEEEEEE!
Rob's voice goes up an octave everytime he starts to get cornered, and his voice goes up a whole lot this discussion.
Louder = righter don't you know that? /s
His voice is seriously so annoying
@@kcthememe5482 I had to pause for a while, couldn't take his voice anymore.
Destiny had so much patience with this guy. He couldn’t address a single question without changing the subject. It’s painful for me to watch this
You have to have Advil on hand to get through 1.5 hours of Rob's screaming
Destiny giving ammunition to his opponents by creating arguments for them and STILL winning the debate is a huge power move
Right??? Haha
@You wanna go do karate in the garage? True! Because Rob defeats Rob. Destiny doesn't even have to do anything.
@@Avenger222 destiny just mimics what the fake news tells him to say... Rob is 50 steps ahead.
@@1060-t4f looking forward to seeing you create another account when you debate Destiny, Rob.
@@Avenger222 That. Comeback. Brilliant.
People blame Destiny for yelling at people yet this guy is legit yelling from his first sentence on through the whole conversation holy shit
"I'm not screaming, it's how I talk"
@@WanderTheNomad this dude asks a question, interrupts Destiny's answer, then complains that he can't finish a thought.
@@phanatic215 destiny does the same shit all the time the fuck you on about
@@HBRchrisHBR you can’t defend him so you try to go for destiny lol
@@everythingisfine8635 ??????
"Yeah your points are good, I agree, but that's because they're the ones I made."
Brutal.
One thing I have noticed Conservatives do a lot is false equivalency. To be fair, both sides can be seen doing it, but Conservatives do it worse. I guess I can understand why.
For the people that want to know why I can understand, I don't think the left has had a Donald Trump as president or a Marjorie Taylor Greene in congress. I don't know if there are conspiracy theory groups like as crazy as QAnon on the left. This is not me defending the right, but if they are trying to do a what-about-ism, it is kind of hard to equate extreme examples to ones that are nowhere near as extreme.
vaguely gesture at imagined hypocrisy
If I had to guess who does it more depends on who you argue with more often.
@@mikehawk9531 vaushtiny
It's so frustrating how he can't seem to talk about the individual points without immediately jumping to "BUT THE DEMOCRATS DID THE SAME THING AND YOU DIDN'T CONDEMN THEM"
“I listed the necessary conditions but not the FINAL condition”
Hahaha 🤣
Like some anime final attack he has been training on 😂😂
Lmao nice one
It was his trap card, lmao.
"Actually you might have proved Trump did everything I said would be necesary to incite a riot, but you didn't know I had a secret condition: being able to read Trumps mind. Checkmate liberals"
@Totally Serious Person If I asked you "what are the conditions for life", then yes, that would be wrong.
@Totally Serious Person that’s not entirely true.
“The two legal prongs that constitute incitement of imminent lawless action are as follows: Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action.”
Point number 2 is what we’re talking about here, and it’s a common condition set under most laws and torts of negligence or nuisance.
Intention is not a legal requirement, if the effect of such rhetoric can be reasonably foreseen. This means that although your intentions may not be to incite violence, you can still incite violence as your rhetoric can be reasonably interpreted to cause lawless activity.
So intention is not a sole requirement like you’ve claimed.
Necessary conditions are just the bare minimum. Meeting all necessary conditions alone doesn't mean anything. This was a nice tactic from destiny but very flawed. I like how so many fucking idiots in the comments fell for it too. How do you watch someone like destiny all day long and not pick up on things like this.
When I hear Destiny: 🤔
When I hear that Rob is the person he’s talking to: 🤦♂️
Rob seems to have a point which Destiny sounds like he's arguing in bad faith for behalf of Cuomo.
@@Gloomlight What?
@@Gloomlight it would be bad faith if Destiny didn't believe what he was saying, I don't think that's true. I agree with Destiny's perspective, there's plenty of reasons why data is withheld for purposes without malice.
@@aydenr5467 Are people saying "bad faith" in bad faith? 🤔
@@WanderTheNomad online debate will now fall into a battle of shouting “bad faith” at each other for a few months until we find a new phrase to substitute for “wrong and an awful person”
Debate coach rule #1. Bring in as many irrelevant points as possible so it looks like the other person is losing.
The only thing you should take from him is that he was surprisingly polite a few times when he accidentally started speaking over Destiny.
Italian Waffle who gives a fuck about politeness in a debate. Politicians push the idea of politeness because it further reinforces the supposed optics of kindness and well being of others
“That’s not even a straw man that’s a phantom man”
The Phantom of the rhetoric
That’s gone straight into my back pocket.
The most blackpilling thing is Rob’s show is named “Normal America” and that is painfully accurate
@@TheRybka30 wot
“The idea that you are impugning me for a hypothetical response i would have to a scenario that never happened based on things you’ve never seen me say” sums up EVERY SINGLE ONE OF ROB’S ARGUMENTS EVER
I was just about to comment this, it perfectly sums up all of robs attacks on destiny and pretty much the left in general. He’s so lost in conspiracy land that he views everything as the “pursuit for the hidden truth” rather than just operating in reality. He’s constantly trying to EXPOSE what you REALLY believe rather than just responding to the arguments given and sticking with the topic at hand.
@@schmittywerbenjagermanjens2649 counterpoint: what about BLM?
@@jamesmontalbano But what about Maxime Waters? Curious.
@@brandonden795 but what about deez nuts?
To me I still cant believe he said there is no systemic racism in America.
This guy's rhetoric can be summarized as:
"We all know the truth, which is what I want it to be, and if you disagree you're lying. Cause the truth is this."
Rob: “If it walks like a duck then it’s being hunted into extinction by the elites to make us care about environmentalism which is a myth designed to control us. Oh but I’m the conspiracy theorist.”
Destiny: “It was actually a man in a goose costume on halloween.”
Rob: “There you go again, always shilling for the elites”
And with dems its "so what you have evidence were lying, you still told your followers to question elections like us and only we can do that ever for reasons and RUSSIA!!!!"
@@marktaylor526 Nah, congress just lied in a impeach trial of a US citizen to stop him from ever running again
@@marktaylor526 LOL, hey don't get me wrong I wish the impeachment passed since that precedent would allow the Republicans to impeach every head figure of the democratic party along with the VP who help pay for legal fees of rioters just only 6 months ago aka finically supporting an insurrection which killed 35 people, ramped up the pandemic, and violated hundreds of thousands of Americans rights to property during an economic disaster. When you have to photoshop dates, you have no case. When you stop a video before a man says support your senators peacefully and patriotically then charge him for tyranny, you still have no case and actually make a case that you should be impeached.
@@marktaylor526 LOL 20 year old here, yea i know what life is like before the iPhone but I'm not that old.
Jimmy from GTA V took a strange direction in life
Jimmy was pretty liberal in 2013
This might have been the most cool and collected I have ever seen destiny against righties, im glad i pressed this when I saw it, right in my FEEEEEEEED
Destiny hates him! Find out how to dodge any question with 3 simple tricks.
🤣
high level meme
I felt myself lose brain cells when after destiny told him how to argue his point, he came back 5 mins later and yelled at destiny that he wanted the chance to argue his point that exact way.
THIS ROB GUY IS A GENIUS!
His strategy is to pivot to a new point when the one he's trying to develop starts to fail.
Yea destiny is weird
@conservatives
The_Guy Low quality bait
@@Dexrazor yea ok “dex”
@@the_guy7305 You could've put a lot more effort into that troll.
Example: "Honestly it's so frustrated that destiny constantly does this instead of just admitting when he's wrong."
That maybe would've gotten one or two people who fell for it. Yours was just obvious.
Destiny seriously handled Rob well. In a response to an argument, Rob's the type to jump around twenty different topics, casually link something to a conspiracy theory, create five different false equivalencies without taking a breath of air, aggressively throw whattabout arguments at the wall until something sticks shift the discussion away from the original topic, and do it all with day 1 Sean Spicer energy
It kills me how much he pivots to move away from being wrong or how much he adds to run away from a point
Destiny writes pivot. I can to. Pivot rivot giblet. Whats your idea. You are a parrot wanting people to make yoy feel good by confirming your own bias
The louder I shout, the righter I am
This guy is only capable of trying to fabricate hypocrisy. That's literally his only debate tactic.
You don't support Republicans who murder people? What about this Democrat who murdered people, I bet you support them! Hypocrite!
and the fact trump said peacefully assemble to support your senators.
The entire political right is based on the tu quoque logical fallacy. It's all they have
@@andrewfolsom3836 what does the left have? your identity this and your identity that basically nazism but anybody besides white people.
@@JallyJam Please dude, let's not pretend like being a conservative isn't basically many people's entire identity's on its own. At least we don't wrap ourselves in Biden clothing and blankets and dresses-- we don't worship the ground that Democrats walk on. That's identity politics kicked up to an extreme. Trump IS your party because you build your personal identities around supporting Trump and being a right winger.
Oh, he listens to the "Epoch Time's", you can already tell he's too far gone.
@SoggyShrimp lol
Most of the country is "too far gone" because they watch MSM.
After dribbling out a baseless conspiracy theory about Russia controlling the election/President/entire country, Rachel Maddow told her viewers that Russia controls the weather and the energy supply. At the time the TV show she hosts was the number one rating news show.
@SoggyShrimp They're a news source equivalent to that Always Sunny meme where he's in front of the conspiracy board. Replace whatever the fuck he's looking at with dem conspiracies. Go watch some of their crackpot ads.
@SoggyShrimp is that what lol means?
@SoggyShrimp they're a biased news source. They shouldn't even be considered news tbh mfs cherry pick shiet and straight up lie.
I, for one, am, forthwith, embracing both 'protesterate' and 'rioterate'.
That was a really good line
Rob be like: to everything turn turn turn there is a hypocrite turn turn turn and a riot that is literally no one's fault.
@You wanna go do karate in the garage? nice meme. I refuse to believe you're being serious. It would be physically impossible for someone this stupid to have not somehow Darwin Awarded themselves before they could get to the age where their parents let them go on RUclips unattended.
@You wanna go do karate in the garage? a joke in what way, person who apparently idolizes John C. Reilly's character in Step Brothers?
@You wanna go do karate in the garage? have a good night buddy. Don't play with sharp things, and be careful with bottles that have a skull on top of crossed bones on them.
@You wanna go do karate in the garage? You're my favorite kind of troll. Keep up the good work there.
is this from the song by the byrds
28:57 "You're asking me, is it possible to incite violence without specifically calling for it, *yes*!"
to
41:41 "I think incitement requires intent, I absolutely do."
literally flip flopping dude. What a weasel.
I really hope this guy isn't actually a debate coach. Dude couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag.
These are contemporary conservative thought leaders. I know, it’s scary.
His only debate tip is to keep going off on tangents until the original point is lost.
Man, do you think the fact 93% of Trump coverage was negative might have been because of his utter incompetence?
This guys loops harder than a Cassette tape.
These teasers are way too long. They should be 10 to 20 seconds long and not over one and a half minute
Yeah I'm not the biggest fan of them. I'd rather just jump into it than watching 2 minutes of something that I'll see in 40 minutes with more context.
No context bait is the new strategy for big youtubers, based on the fact people decide if they'll watch in the first 30 seconds usually.
Not a good strategy for nearly an hour of content tho lol.
If I have that sort of time, I'm there !
If you watch at x2 speed it only takes 30-45 seconds
This is probably my favorite debate in a while
Destiny: Gives well articulated answer
Rob: B U L L S H I T !
Destiny has demonstrated here a greater emotional control, without depriving us viewers of entertainment, which would be good to learn from if you are looking to improve internet discourse. An impressive use of rhetorical understanding from someone who has been so terrible in the past.
Holy shit
"Let me ask you this:
Do you think if we have all these major institutions acting a certain way, that it will influence a number of votes?"
"No."
Well done, impeccable
This is what happens when you major in communication
What do you mean?
@@acjimenez94 I see you majored in communication
@@guybrushthreepwood9071 what do you mean?
@CaptainSarcasticSWAGG I see you majored in communication
@@AT-AT26 what do you mean?
Rob’s voice sounds a bit like Garrett from community
Crisis alert. Crisis alert. Crisis alert.
Crisis alert. Crisis alert. Crisis alert.
IT’S A BEAR DANCE!
I mean, marrying your cousin is a pretty Republican move...
Garrett, do you take as a lawful husband Destiny.
Well, that was exhausting.
So I'm in highschool but this man rlly sounds like a middleschooler crying about how kaiba is a better duelist than yugi
🤣🤣🤣yugi cheats tho . Exodia my ass
@@frenkysprod.4223 rob: why is yugi allowed to have exodia but not kaiba? Clearly rigged
@@frenkysprod.4223 I mean he really does kinda cheat. The Millenium puzzle’s special power was to will cards to the top of his deck.
If Yugi didn't have the Gayllenium Puzzles OP "heart of the not playing fair" garbage Kaiba would have smoked his shrimp ass deck every time.
Sounds like Destiny is arguing with an adult version of Snot from American Dad lol
Omg it really does 🤣
Between him and Jimmy from gtav they have vary similar voices
You know what I love about Destiny, is how consistent he is. No matter what hes talking about and no matter what game he plays he will always find a way to jump from object to object continuisly for over an hour.
As someone who's been out of gaming for a decade, what game is this?
@@mrjimmbo i have absolutely no idea but its something like factorio
How can Trump supporters have so much faith in the government's power but also think they can overturn it?
The ultimate debate tactic: hiding the FINAL condition until they've proved the other 3
Oh oh oh! My turn to say context! Dems were saying fight in court for rights of minorities, and Rudy was saying trial by combat to a bunch of disgruntled voters who brought weapons
@SoggyShrimp I can't tell if you're brain dead or if youre trolling
@SoggyShrimp you literally only know the context of the video they showed omg that's so sad
TLDW Summary: Destiny unsuccessfully tries to argue that incitement does not first require intention.
Stupid, you say? Yes, very.
Moronic, you say? Yes, very.
Disingenuous and partisan, you say? 100%
Still mucking around ay?
Damn, although he was dense as a coconut in the end, after all these turns, he tried his best to argue in good faith and honestly answer some questions. I mean imo he is delusional, but in the end i understood his position and his reasoning, its more sad than funny..
11:07 The exact moment homie started fully malding.
This is the epitome of my favorite saying "Listen to understand rather than respond."
41:16 is so insane and where Rob really just goes totally batshit.
Everytime Rob talks i can just picture him putting his right arm on the desk then switching to his left arm and so on every 3 seconds lol
it is really really impressive how destiny is able to listen to Rob constantly change the topic, sometimes completely and sometimes really subtlety, then catch him and reel the conversation back to the original topic. Literally this dude will ramble on for like 5 minutes about something that is barely even connected to what they are talking about (20:00), and other times he will answer a question and halfway through his answer make it so that everything he said was an answer to a different question (38:45)
Why does this guy speak in all caps.
It's rhetorical effective for his audience
Underrated comment right here. Rob is INSUFFERABLE.
He's like that loud guy in dilbert. Lol. I think it's a combination of using a mic. Not being in the same room as the guy you are arguing with and with someone who does talk while you are talking.
It's been said one million times but this guy shouts all the time for no reason.
"I'm NOT SCREAMING IT'S HOW I TALK. *ONE*"
It never fails. Every time. And I mean EVERY. TIME. A right leaning individual comes in to debate their mic is always messed up. Robs mic is always cutting in and out and he talks super fast you can barely understand a word he’s saying. Super annoying.
Rob is on the wrong side of history and a little too deep into his own agenda, but he's insanely polite, I think this is one of the most cordial debates I've ever seen destiny having. Rob says a lot of stuff I disagree with, but I really can't hate the guy.
Lol Robb complaining about media portraying trump negatively like Trump didn't literally do negative shit weekly when he was in office
Trump supporters: "I love it when Trump triggers the libs. Keep hating him, we owned you snowflakes!"
Trump supporters when he loses the election: "There's no way 80 million people voted against him, he was beloved!"
"For me its not about partisanship, but establishment vs not establishment"
This is a HUGE red flag, that means he can mould whatever event with whichever people involved to fit his narrative, he can label whatever people he deems "establishment" and dismiss their actions as an evil plan that fits his conspiracies.
Loki main? Disgusting
THIS, categorizing groups like that can lead to pulling some bullshit
@@Kurisma the nostalgia you just gave me, havent changed the pic in 5 years. It is disgusting XD
Rob is just a huge partisan hack.
The king of "you would've done this if he would've done that"
The Chosen one has returned to his Throne of Conservative skulls!
@SoggyShrimp It calls for nothing. Standing on a puddle of Oil that was there before you got there, doesn't call for the violence of Dinosaurs.
@SoggyShrimp I guess I won't take responsibility for you only reading one book in your whole life, but look into some good stuff, you might catch other big words like Hyperbole or Metaphor or Allegory. But no biggie, I understand that Libraries are far away sometimes, it's aight.
Re: 33:55 "'when I hear leftists say how systemically biased and racist the system is and there's nothing that could be done' or that 'riot are the language of the unheard'". The thing is... _it seems_ Trumps audience is more devoted to him than whoever "leftists" audience is devoted to the leftist that said those statements. So, the state of mind of the audience could matter because devotion can make one more easily influenced and called to action.
55:22 Mindyanapolis!!! Being from “Mindyanapolis,” I get a kick every time I hear it pronounce like this. Outside of the state, it is more often pronounced Mindyanapolis than Minneapolis. I don’t correct people or get irritated at all. It is just one of those things that make me chuckle internally. Hehehe
You get the coverage you deserve pal.
I hope that you do more convos with Rob. He seems like one of the few conservatives who actually does some research
57:13 “I don’t think we have a student loan crisis, personally.” - Destiny
Yeeeahhh, that’s an insanely bad, out-of-touch take. There are people who’ve been out of college for 20-30 years who are still paying theirs back. 🤦♂️
There are people who took out a mortgage 25 years ago still paying it back.
Wait...destiny this new tactic is so good for you....it’s so good to push a “good faith argument”
55:32 How are you in such a pivoting loop. That you pivot going to the restroom into another talking point? LMAO can't make this stuff up. Political identities are the problem in America
Rob’s whole thing is accusing Destiny of being hypocritical every time he can’t defend a point
BUT NANCY PELOSI AND KAMALA HARRIS SAID BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!!1!!!
@@TimPortantno Good job missing the point.
Good thumbnails.
they are starting to stand out and set a recognizable brand
this dudes tone of voice makes him sound like a lunatic
This is a typical conservative debate, pivot misdirection, point fingers and blame. With no straightforward answers to questions.
I can't deal with Robs voice, it goes up and down in pitch by a octave on alternating syllables, makes him sound like hes going to bust out into tears.
You can always push any view you want with the following process:
1. Carefully select parts of quotes from people "on the other side" that are consistent with your views when interpreted out of context.
2. Combine the quotes to form a speech that only supports your views. If the people referenced have said something inconsistent, ignore it.
3. Pretend that since the source material references the people "on the other side", your entire speech is representative of the them.
Rob's voice is like nails on a chalkboard. Also I feel like the Times article gets misinterpreted a lot.
Yeah dont bother debating Rob again. His gishgalloping is next level.
Destiny did very well. He should continue debating like this
The way this rob guy talks and swings the conversation literally had given me such a migraine. I don't know why I bothered to let myself listen to this for about an hour.
Watched this live, great performance by Steven.
Everybody’s gangsta until destiny brings out the Microsoft Notepad
Rob is so heavily emotional about this, he can't get out of his own way. I liked that Destiny literally had to give him the debate format as a template for how to continue (meaning when he said how he could "own" Rob and vice versa). That was hilarious. I was a debater in high school and a debate judge in college, and anytime anyone was as emotional as Rob is, they usually end up being vastly less effective in proving their case. On a separate note, I like the new, "more rhetorically effective" Destiny. He is doing even better, and he was already a kick ass debater before. So Bravo.
Rob is the living animus of brainworms
Yea, getting emotional in a debate is bad move. You get flustered, and can't have any meaningful argument. To me it shows bad faith, and possible lieing.
@@pogo8050 lushlife for lyfe
"This isn't even a strawman, this is like a phantom-man."
Ahh, the classic "gish gallop".
Just light a hundred fires and when your opponent can't extinguish them all, declare victory over the burning rubble.
Rob, you're everything wrong with humanity.
Saying "we could never prove the intention of a person" when we're talking about courts of law is straight-up false. Intent plays a huge role in our legal system and, in some states, can make or break a death penalty case (e.g. the difference between first-degree murder and second-degree murder is whether or not you intended to murder them beforehand.)
Rob totally shit the bed when asked to provide his conditions though. This whole conversation about stakes was completely irrelevant. If we're talking about incitement to violence, you need to demonstrate that
1. A specific person
2. Was placed in imminent danger of bodily harm
3. As an immediate consequence
4. Of a specific statement that I made which could not be reasonably interpreted as anything other than a call to violence.
I don't know that intention is a necessary condition for this. I can imagine a public speaker identifying a specific person in a crowd at a speaking engagement and saying things like, "If one of these people hit you, I'd shake their hand! You deserve to be utterly savaged--" and then panicking as a bunch of people dogpile the guy because he didn't believe they'd actually engage in violence. But it would have to be airtight.
Agreed - intention can be proved.
However, interpreting Trump's intent depends on the individual "Trump whisperer."
Wait a minute... has Destiny just admmited to have information about the Lizard People in the govermment? Why isn't he releasing it?!
To incite is to provoke. Neither definitions require intent, these words refer to consequence of action. For this reason, to hold the position that Trump's words didn't incite rioting would require that Rob holds a standard for incitement that probably far exceeds the average person. I wonder if in his mind, provocation is synonymous with a direct call to action. Anything short of Trump saying to riot specifically would not be sufficient for him. That seems unreasonable to me. :- /
"I listed the necessary condition but not the final condition"
Rob watches too much anime
Rob is inconsistent.
When asked if someone could insight a riot without explicitly saying go comit violence... he said yes and listed criteria.
Then afterwards added a condition that they needed to “intend” it.
But that flips his earlier agreement that someone could insight it without explicit saying it because by his metric of proving “intent” they would have to explicit say it for him to believe the intent.
Why can this guy not make the distinction between the capitol and a police station. Seriously bud?
How about communities? Why are people allowed to loot your life away but LETS GET 50 CALS FOR PEOPLE RIOTING ABOUT THE ELECTIONS BUT NOT OVER A RACE. If the shiny house on the hill is more important than the houses at the bottom of the hill then what's the purpose of having the shiny house on top of the hill?
@@JallyJam because police are actually killing black people, the election wasnt actually stolen. Seek help
I’m pretty sure this is Tim Dillion charading as a debate coach
Ah yes, Donald Trump the anti-establishment figurehead. The same Donald Trump who’s also a son of a billionaire, who’s been a New York real estate mogul for decades, who’s been connected with powerful people since childhood, who always got special treatment from those powerful and influential, and who closely worked with establishment Republicans his entire presidency. Truly a hero of the common man. The detachment from reality of conservatives is unreal
Rob speaks in all caps
Brah, why ya gotta bait me into subjecting my ears to rob's anime voice?
Have my Trap Card.... Intent (Face Down in Defence mode)
In Rob's world you can't protest fascism without allowing fascists to protest democracy. For Rob both are the same thing! For Rob both are bad or both are good.
Top ten moments before a disaster:
1.*destiny pulls out his computer notepad*
While I agree with some of what Rob says, he made the mistake of lowering the bar for the criteria for "incitement". The bar is, necessarily, high for this. His criteria require knowing the mental state (or mind) of the person making the statement and the hearer, which we cannot know. This is why specific and explicit statements are/should be required for "incitement." This then draws a better (although not perfect) link between intent and the utterances. The understanding of the statement by the hearer can be inferred by the actions they take. Rob was the undoing of his own argument.
This dude sounds like Wallace Shawn. Its like Mr Incredibles boss is arguing with destiny.
That's inconceivable
I would pay to see Wallace Shawn yell at destiny for no reason
This is really interesting and makes total sense. Conservatives can't actually talk about their own side. They can't talk about what happened. They can't stay on topic. They HAVE TO constantly pivot to talking about the left or the Democrats because they have no way to defend their own beliefs and actions. It absolutely makes perfect sense that this would be the way the conservatives debate since this is what they always do. They have no arguments of their own, the only thing they have is attacking Democrats and the left. This was a really good example of what trying to keep a conservative on topic does. It flusters them and they flounder around for 20 minutes desperately trying to get you to talk about the left. It makes them look really bad because they don't have an answer for anything you're saying and can't stay on topic. I think this is a really important lesson to take from this debate. When trying to debate conservatives, make sure to hold their feet to the fire and keep them on topic. Don't let them change the subject and do "whataboutism"s.
Destiny expertly held him to the point here, and the way he framed the questions made its painfully obvious when Rob tries to pivot.
the conservative sounds like snot from family guy, or booger from revenge of the nerds. either works. lmfao cant unpicture him debating Destiny now. lol not a bad thing, just. cant unsee it.
There ought to be a time stamp at 44:00 so people can just skip ahead to when Rob invalidates the entire conversation by moving goal posts.
This conversation was much less painful to listen to than some of the previous conversations I've heard Destiny have with people.