Charlie Kirk gets stumped.

Dumb video… and it cuts off before Charlie even responds…

He ate Charlie up with facts

By stumped... you really mean filibustered.

Kirk wasn't stumped. The dude was talking to fast and changing questions before he could even answer.

I could win this argument and I’m not even that smart. He didn’t let him speak.

That's because we elect representatives by districts and not by race/religion/gender/secual orientation or any other metric. I will pray for you.

Yes cutting off the video literally stumps 100% of people. Congrats on the gotcha.

How can you say he is stumped? You cut the video before his rebuttal. What's your personal opinion of black Republicans?

If course you cut clip before his response

Love how you cut out before Charlie makes his points. Loser.

This is called gish galloping. You don’t let the opposing party fully respond and throw the next potential „fact“ at them to try to show your IQ superiority. Difference is, you prepared your facts, he knew.

So much is wrong too. 100 senators. 53 republicans. 1 black. 1 out of 53 is about 2%. Not a fraction of a fraction. 5 black republican congressman out of 219 is also a little over 2%. Blacks are 13% of the country and 17% are republican - 2.89% of the country.

Didn’t the people vote for those people regardless whether they were black, white, Christian, non-Christian?

It’s a Christian country dumbass

Its funny how almost every debate where Charlie takes on an adult with a fully matured brain ends with him getting absolutely cooked

The majority of black population are Democrats so wouldn't stand to reason that most of the black politicians would also be Democrat? I'm not sure what point the guy was trying to make.

He actually created the space for that conversation to happen, am sure he never went into every conversation thinking he was always going to have the final say, but he nevertheless showed up for conversation with those he never agreed with. We can’t say that about anyone else

Talking over someone and not letting them respond is not the same as getting stumped...I can ask a simple question and then constantly speak over the person so they dont get to answer the question..doesn't mean I stumped them just that I wouldn't let them answer..debate 101 man

Genuinely what substantive point was made here

Posts guy gets stumped. Doesn’t include part that he responded

Why do you disingenuous idiots keep clipping to fit your narrative. Anyone that has seen or sees the entire debate can see the truth. Try showing the entire exchange and see how it differs.

Dang where’s the rest of the video

You’re a real piece of shit. I’ve watched this whole debate in real time. You are a fucking piece of scum dude for real fuck right off. You’re fucking disgusting. I don’t even think you’re a fucking human being.

If he was getting stumped why’d you clip it before he responded??

Let's be real, anyone you show that you think wins a debate didn't let him speak. Dumbass..

😂😂😂 such a reach on your part

“Hold on” = “Stop talking so I can change the subject before my fans realize you just exposed my errors in logic.”

Everyone is stumped if you cut the video short

Dumb shit again

He actually held his own here far better than i could, i give charlie props here but i also understand the point the other dude was making but in argument terms he didn’t solidify his point well.

I am Charlie Kirk.

It’s as if they have just been pushing debates where Kirk comes out on top…

The time people are taking to vilify a father just assassinated is wild.

Good points… I don’t know what Charlie said because the video editing here is so bad! But the guy had some valid questions …