Failure on Ben’s part here. He’s so used to American journalism he fails to understand that Andrew is playing devils advocate. Justin Z what? The questions made perfect sense and the Wolf it’s not over when you lose it’s over when you quit shirt was just trying to hold Ben accountable for his blatant hypocrisy. His behaviour at the end was just unprofessional and embarrassing, how can you not see that?To call Neil, who edits the Spectator, has written for the Mail and the Times left wing shows how ridiculous his point is.
Wolf it’s not over when you lose it’s over when you quit shirt, ladies tee, tank top, hoodie and sweater
Matthew O’Malley not really, the Wolf it’s not over when you lose it’s over when you quit shirt are basically the lefts propaganda machine. You can see it in their video about “the rise of far right in europe” so I don’t fault him for seeing straight through their mightier than thou attitude. Personally I wouldn’t waste my taxes on them if I had a choice. Absolutely right. Despite his supposed cred as a ‘tough debater,’ he showed that he’s completely lost in an adversarial interview against someone who isn’t a complete moron (or a confused college kid who has never spoken on a microphone before), who will fall into doing that little semantic dance with him.
He honestly hasn’t done well against anyone I have seen him debate seriously (Tucker Carlson, Cenk Uygur, Sam Harris), but I am shocked by how bad he messed up here. He borderline acted like a lunatic…the Wolf it’s not over when you lose it’s over when you quit shirt stereotype he accused Neil of trying to make him out as. This is supposed to be the tough-talking policy guy with the minimum of nonsense.