Charlie Kirk: Full of S__t!

"I've been watching some of these Charlie Kirk videos that have been popping up since he died, and woah."

"He is not a reliable source of information, he just used shady debate tactics and bad argument logic against young people who didn't know much so he could "win" debates."

"He actually thought drawing parallels of the MAGA movement to the Nazis' treatment of minority groups was equivalent to drawing parallels between dog owners and Hitler just because Hitler was a dog owner."

Charlie Kirk is an unreliable source who employed shady debate tactics and flawed argument logic to secure debate wins. He targeted young or less-informed people to exploit gaps in knowledge and gain rhetorical advantage. He equated the MAGA movement's treatment of minority groups with Nazi persecution in a manner that relied on superficial parallels. He presented that comparison as if it were comparable to pointing out Hitler owned a dog and equating dog owners to Hitler. Those tactics produced misleading rhetoric rooted in false equivalencies rather than substantive evidence.

Read at Portland Mercury