David Pakman - A Good Faith Debate with a Progressive

💥Join us on our Journey to 1 Million Subscribers💥 David Pakman is a progressive political commentator and host of The David Pakman Show on YouTube.

OR Support TRIGGERnometry Here:

Bitcoin: bc1qm6vvhduc6s3rvy8u76sllmrfpynfv94qw8p8d5

​​​

Advertise on TRIGGERnometry:

Join the Mailing List:

Find TRIGGERnometry on Social Media:

About TRIGGERnometry:

-
Chapters:

00:00 Intro
01:20 What is Social Democracy?
04:47 Tax Reform
08:01 The Democratic Party
09:18 Populism vs Social Democracy
11:39 Biden Administration and Afghanistan Withdrawal
15:45 Biden Presidency vs Trump Presidency
21:42 President Trump: Symptom or Problem
28:04 Globalisation
34:19 Definition of a 'Woman'
36:42 Debate: Transgender Prisoners
47:03 Immigration
58:47 'Defund the Police' vs Police Reform

[paulstefanski]

12:45 "Did anything change materially" - yes, there are now direct commercial flights between UAE and Israel, which were not previously allowed. There are also now trade agreements allowing the private sector in each country (and other signatories of the Abraham Accords) to engage in trade. Economically and symbolically, these were positive changes brought during the Trump administration. There is no coherent rebuttal from the democrats who refuse to admit that the Trump administration ever did anything good. (I also voted for Biden btw, but I'm not captured enough to think there aren't good and bad people on both sides.)

[AUgrad]

“Should a person with a penis be in a female prison”

Packman “ I have to know more about these cases”

What a weasel.

[blahizake]

He wreaks of bad faith and condescension.

[simonw]

Pakman is so dishonest and slippery in this interview. One moment we "need more specifics" and the next we're "too far in the weeds". It's clear he doesn't have any actual answers to these questions by the way he spends the whole hour deflecting.

[SN-jhbb]

Bloke has reality and identity problems.

[mizaklaw]

Pakman is a slippery guest. His denial of basic points of agreement comes off as slimy. He'd be a clever litigator but he's nothing more than a shyster.

[robdielemans]

Well done guys, you've established that you are able to have honest conversations with people with opposing views.

[TheNancypoo]

Dude dismisses that the virus came out of that lab.

[travisbeastwood]

If you want honest dialogue, why would you invite Pakman. The dude is on the same level of bullshittery as Joy Reid et al.

[davidromero]

Sorry, but there is nothing about Pakman that is in good faith. He is the king of the strawman argument.

[mrmagoozle]

“I look to see what the world think…”
This guy is delusional. Pakman needs to be sent to a gulag.

[insomnijack]

"good faith" and "progressive" don't go together

[markimark]

He comes across as incredibly arrogant.

[lacka]

wow this guy lies about anything just to keep to the narrative.

[gregfmaddux]

Parkman might be the most smug person. On earth.

[scott]

I am sorry…If this guest ‘cannot see a way the withdrawal from Afghanistan could have been done better’ he is ignorant about the issue.

[carolecollins]

I see Pakman sent his stans over here. What a child

[phairpil]

This lefty is a good talker …. But that’s it… He has go-to phrases to extricate himself from difficult questions or where he knows his position is indefensible.

[thedowntroddenman]

Man I hate when people argue in this manner. To slightly twist a response to make it sound like one agrees with him is just smug salesmanship. KK was way too polite, bordering on waivering from his true beliefs. This guy is an obvious elitist who I’m sure thinks himself the smartest guy in the room.

[scotthullinger]

The Left have never once made a "good faith" debate with anyone -