Would you win a debate against Vausch ?
Who?
>>543899451From what little I've seen of him, yeah. Just keep circling back to horsecock.
>>543899451No he's just too powerful.
wish he followed hasan's route and put on some better clothes.those tanktops paired with his repulsive body are revolting to look at.
No, probably not. Debates have rules where you argue a set of known facts. Those facts are made by the people that set the narrative for the whole world. Facts come from university studies, think tanks, newspapers, magazine articles, etc. >"how many genders are there?""WTF, there are two">"can you prove that""It is a known fact, what do you mean?">"Well I can cite 30 articles that there are over 162 genders""Fuck off">???See if you can find more articles and studies that climate change is real, heckin valid and we should pay a tax to fix it ... or that it is total bullshit. Why do you think all lefties say, 'source pls'.
>>543899579
>>543899451Probably yeah, never heard him talk though.
>>543899451If it's a debate on how best to suck and take dick, probably not as I have no experience in that field. Literally anything else, probably.
>>543899451Anyone can win by not talking to jews, even though I broke that rule by talking to you.But I have to talk to you to tell you to kill yourself.
>>543899451No idea who the fuck this is because I get snatch
>>543899761>better clothes A foid made fun of him and he listened to her.
>>543901003well the foid is right. vauch looks fucking repulsive.
>>543899871>the evidence doesn't support what I want to be true therefore its fakeyou don't need a study to know climate change is real. Everybody around the world has experienced the climate shifting over the last few decades. denying climate change is on the same level of retard as creationism and flat earth. kek
>>543899451talking to him would already be an instant loss
>>543899451bring a gun
>>543899451I'd bring in a horse to distract him
>>543903332whoops i thought this said HOW would you win a debate against vausch?
>>543899451no I'd say stuff too quiet then he'd tell me to speak up and I'd get really flustered and apologize and probably just silently leave
>>543899451Who? also yes.
>>543899451I don't speak to demented american freaks who has child porn on his computer and fantasizes about horse cocks
unironic answer having watched vaush 'debate' (in a time before I truly fathomed how degenerate and insincere online political commentators were)Your only possible win is to keep the debate on topic. He literally does not prepare for the topic of a debate and instead plans conversation paths to do the following:First - be able to change the topic at will by seeding various points of contention about definitionsSecond - gaslight you in realtime about things he or you have said during the debate until the debate becomes about talking about what has happened so far in the debate.Third - all the while slipping in ad hominems and contextless 'problematic' quotes, or straight up misquotes of you or people you reference or who he thinks are connected to you in some way until you take the bait and attack back or even better call out his debate 'style' at which point the validity of even having the debate comes up if you came there in 'bad faith'.Finally - once the debate has become circular, lost any connection to the initial question, he's gotten you to sperg out enough for his editors to get a few decent out of context clips, he will claim a moral victory since 'nothing of value happened here today', refuse to engage any further with you beyond snide sarcastic attacks then make his excuses and leaveHe's pretty good at it and he genuinely has no intention of debating anyone in good faith ever. He literally doesn't understand the benefit of it and only sees human interaction as a means to an end. He's stupid enough to have talked about all of this openly on cam but smart enough to make it entertaining for his cynical followers and believable enough for the idiots.
