trump always looks like a satisfied turtle for some reason
I actually watched 27 minutes of this before giving up. Most of it is saying "no you're wrong" without going much farther than that.
He brings up some pretty decent points, but they mostly focus on the extremities of Trump's criticism, ie stuff that is bad but has been blown way out of proportion (ie. KKK stuff). Other than that, his defense is flimsy at best, generally making sweeping generalizations about Trump critics by thoroughly analyzing the little jokes that John Oliver put in to make the thing actually funny, stuff that generally wasn't meant to be taken seriously (gotRump.com).
In fact, the only joke he liked was when he said that "Trump" is the sound a servant makes when he is slapped across the face with a wad of $100 bills.
He never attacks the root of the argument, and instead tries to expand any Trump quotes John Oliver put in, while at the same time attacking any jokes that are made about Trump's character. His response to Trump's use of bankruptcies as way to silence critics is "So why are lawsuits bad? Are the suits against Trump University bad too?" which entirely misses the point that was presented. His response to the accusation that trump is lying when Trump repeatedly saying that he is "almost entirely self-funding" when he has taken in over 7 million dollars is "So what? People like him a lot, and it'd be a hassle to have to send it back."
I think that Trump is overplayed in the media. I think criticizing every little minute thing he does is not only useless but it also destabilizes the opposing position. However, if you're going to defend him, defend him on the root arguments that everything else stems from. Bigotry, fear-mongering, and blatant lies are what people are most afraid of, not re-tweeting Mussolini and the like. Attacking the fringe arguments solves nothing and shouldn't be considered "logical thought," which Molyneux is so proud of.
[B]TL;DR: Not worth the watch, he never hits any main points behind the jokes[/B]
[QUOTE=Derposaurus;49900242]He brings up some pretty decent points, but they mostly focus on the extremities of Trump's criticism, ie stuff that is bad but has been blown way out of proportion (ie. KKK stuff). Other than that, his defense is flimsy at best, generally making sweeping generalizations about Trump critics by thoroughly analyzing the little jokes that John Oliver put in to make the thing actually funny, stuff that generally wasn't meant to be taken seriously (gotRump.com).
In fact, the only joke he liked was when he said that "Trump" is the sound a servant makes when he is slapped across the face with a wad of $100 bills.
He never attacks the root of the argument, and instead tries to expand any Trump quotes John Oliver put in, while at the same time attacking any jokes that are made about Trump's character. His response to Trump's use of bankruptcies as way to silence critics is "So why are lawsuits bad? Are the suits against Trump University bad too?" which entirely misses the point that was presented. His response to the accusation that trump is lying when Trump repeatedly saying that he is "almost entirely self-funding" when he has taken in over 7 million dollars is "So what? People like him a lot, and it'd be a hassle to have to send it back."
I think that Trump is overplayed in the media. I think criticizing every little minute thing he does is not only useless but it also destabilizes the opposing position. However, if you're going to defend him, defend him on the root arguments that everything else stems from. Bigotry, fear-mongering, and blatant lies are what people are most afraid of, not re-tweeting Mussolini and the like. Attacking the fringe arguments solves nothing and shouldn't be considered "logical thought," which Molyneux is so proud of.
[B]TL;DR: Not worth the watch, he never hits any main points behind the jokes[/B][/QUOTE]
After watching the whole thing too I have to agree, it's not more of a defence than it is him arguing that it's unfair to attack someone on a personal level as a candidate (which is true) rather than actually defending his points and then this guy acts like he is above what John Oliver is saying even though he is misunderstanding the points he is even talking about.
Never liked stefan molyneux, the man's a borderline conspiracy theorist.
[video=youtube;DnpO_RTSNmQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnpO_RTSNmQ[/video]
Here's the original video if you haven't watched it.
20 million views in a week, my God.
Isn't Molyneux that guy who made Black and White?
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;49901126]Isn't Molyneux that guy who made Black and White?[/QUOTE]
That'd be [I]Peter[/I] Molyneux, friend.
[QUOTE=AimlessGiant;49900295]After watching the whole thing too I have to agree, it's not more of a defence than it is him arguing that it's unfair to attack someone on a personal level as a candidate (which is true) rather than actually defending his points and then this guy acts like he is above what John Oliver is saying even though he is misunderstanding the points he is even talking about.[/QUOTE]
this is exactly why john oliver's denied being journalistic in the past. while this show has definitely brought a lot of obscure but important issues to light, at the end of the day its a satirical news show, and comedy also includes taking ad hominem potshots at people
[QUOTE=Derposaurus;49900242]his defense is flimsy at best, generally making sweeping generalizations about Trump critics by thoroughly analyzing the little jokes that John Oliver put in to make the thing actually funny, stuff that generally wasn't meant to be taken seriously (gotRump.com).[/QUOTE]
this sort of thorough, grudgingly slow (and, needless to say, very biased) analysis is always prone to overthinking
like how he takes the tiny, tiny bit about people liking trump because he's unpredictable (which was just a way to get the segment to move along, not an assertion that it's the only reason people like trump) and uses it to lead into a pathetic tirade about how john oliver lives in a "liberal biosphere"
Why am i reading the comments?
Why do i keep doing that?
trump is such a low hanging fruit for mediocre comedians and clickbait websites
[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;49905127]trump is such a low hanging fruit for mediocre comedians and clickbait websites[/QUOTE]
John Oliver tried to ignore talking about him but after major stuff happened during the GOP campaign (like trump winning most primaries and caucuses), Trump is just too big to ignore.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
