Comments by "Eigelstein" (@Eigelstein) on "Jubilee" channel.

Jubilee does not seem interested in finding common ground anymore. Inflammatory content probably makes them more money.
51
And a very painful comment section.
38
She also said that she speaks common sense a.k.a. "This is my bias therefore it is true."
25
@Ed95366 He just uses her logic against her. She advocates for this worldview, but she can't put her money where her mouth is.
22
@Ayxan287 Does not matter, it is a panel to find middle ground that he consented to be on. A specific social setting means that you should behave in a specific way, or at least adjust your mannerisms to serve the goal of the panel. If he acted like this during a funeral it would also be freedom of speech but nobody would respect it.
22
@OttawaFreedom They could actually have a balanced panel instead of having one side be republican pundits?
5
@OttawaFreedom The moderator could actually try to guide the conversation and keep the panellists on topic?
4
@thejuggl3r442 Absolutely not. He claims that the definition of marriage is a certain way and tries to "prove" that using an ad populum fallacy. He never backed up his definition in any objective way, and thus, the entire claim falls apart because he has not met his burden of proof.
4
 @S3MTX How about a KKK costume? What if someone was wearing a Confederacy cape?
4
@aidanaldrich7795 Jubilee is supposed to moderate the convo. That means that both sides should be balanced. If they cannot get any democrat influencers (which I doubt) then there should not be any republican influencers either. If there are no regular Republicans (which I doubt) then there should be no convo.
3
Time to lock and load your keyboards because this comment section is about to become a war zone.
3
@MrJamtd The only problem with that rationale is that being a winner or a loser are subjective statements. Many people define winning and losing differently and value different kinds of winning and losing. 'If you haven't f****d 100 people by the time you are 30 then you are a loser!' Uuuuuuhhhh, oke if you think so I guess. But, I don't really care about that.
2
He actually does finally leave at the end (at 1:17:33), to much of a coward to shake hands with the people he has been insulting for over an hour.
1
@otal0721 Just ignore him, he is a bad faith conservatard.
1
@Lucy-dn8gn The problem appears to be that a bunch of people in the US are homophobic. It is the easiest way to explain why they are jumping through so many hoops to make a social construct something objective.
1
@Lucy-dn8gn The problem appears to be that a bunch of people in the US are homophobic. It is the easiest way to explain why they are jumping through so many hoops to make a social construct something objective.
1
@Lucy-dn8gn The problem appears to be that a bunch of people in the US are homo____pffhobic. It is the easiest way to explain why they are jumping through so many hoops to make a social construct something objective.
1
@Lucy-dn8gn The problem appears to be that a bunch of people in the US are ""same-sex phobic"" (thx YT). It is the easiest way to explain why they are jumping through so many hoops to make a social construct something objective.
1
@Lucy-dn8gn The problem appears to be that a bunch of people in the US are ""same-sex scared"" (thx YT). It is the easiest way to explain why they are jumping through so many hoops to make a social construct something objective.
1
@thejuggl3r442 1:10 Historical part of claim. 4:13 asserts that the government cannot recognise it without providing evidence. Before he said it was a square ball, but he has not proven the "shape".
1
@thejuggl3r442 5:15 His definition. He says it is true because of nature? He does not prove that his definition is the one observed in "nature" and it is an appeal to nature argument, which is bad. 6:28 ad populum appeal.
1
@thejuggl3r442 6:43 The burden of proof fallacy. 15:10 Technically speaking a variation of the ad populum fallacy.
1
@thejuggl3r442 It appears a bunch of your comments didn't appear.
1
@ "For the second claim ... somewhere" without any specifics." This is the only one I see.
1
@ I have stood by, nothing has appeared.
1
 @tupacshakur3745 60% of the time, it works every time.
1
@tupacshakur3745 60% of the time, it works every time.
1
@Honeybee9642 Then the problem that you have is with the debate format, not with him speaking a lot.
1
Jubilee, this is ridiculous. I do not think that YT will allow me to type out the first prompt. But seriously, you take such a serious topic and turn it into a game?!?!?!?!?! I am getting really close to unsubscribing and am definitely not giving you the watch time.
1