Joe, I get it. I really do. Smoking pot is the backbone of our beautiful nation that I love dearly...

>Joe, I get it. I really do. Smoking pot is the backbone of our beautiful nation that I love dearly. I just personally don't see the point in condoning it's use, but if you do that's fine and if I have personally offended you and your dominant male ego than I genuinely apologize for my behavior. I just hope you can understand that I meant you no harm and love your show. When we get together we make magic and I only hope your amazingly smart audience can understand and not hate me personally because it really hurts my feelings to read comments after videos safe posted and see that people are saying things about me and OH SHIT I JUST MISSED MY FLIGHT I HAVE TO GO

What did Crowler mean by this, Sup Forums?

why book a flight with zero wiggle room from your podcast?
from my fantasy, being a guest on the show discussing my passion of zoology, I planned to offer Joe out for dinner as a debriefing of sorts, and then he would drive me to the airport after I give him a guilt trip

>why book a flight with zero wiggle room from your podcast?
He never expected Joe to be such a cuckold about weed smoking and figured that if he didn't care about a particular topic, Joe wouldn't pursue it for a good 40 minutes.

My cynical thought initially, was that Crowder made up the thing about the flight in order to end the podcast; it was a not so subtle hint to Joe, that he wanted to get out of there. The whole thing was cringe-worthy for more reasons than one. It was a clash of two egos.

Any autist can plainly see he made that up on he spot to get out of further looking like a beta faggot.

Joe was in a shitty mood to begin with.
Crowler wasn't helping with insecurities.

Joe Rogan seems like a guy who would converse civilly if you challenged one of his opinions, did he really bend over scared after he challenged Rogan?

He couldnt have held his ground and talked like a human?
Whats rogan gonna do? Jump the table and MMA his ass?

I agree, but Crowder wasn't being a prick. He obviously mentioned an article he had read, Joe got triggered, to which he then demanded Jamie find as many sources as possible to prove Crowder wrong.
If Crowder chosen to do exactly the same to back up the article he read, it would be different

They were both in the wrong.

Crowder was using cheap debate tactics like bringing up Jamie. and suddenly everything Joe says is invalidated because "oh I'm in hostile territory and I'm getting ganged up on".

but at the same time, Joe Rogan was being an ass too because he's the host and you're supposed to have better control of your show. and you knew he was anti-pot when you brought him on

Joe went full on meathead 'dude, weed' mode on Crowder. There was no excuse, I don't care if he was only 'pretending to be retarded', when you can't tell the difference, then it's time to change the tone and delivery.

Crowder was a cunt for being so squirmy and weaselly in the conversation: "Wahhh, stop double teaming on me. And, "On my soap box we don't do things this way". For a person who didn't care about weed, he couldn't keep shutting up about it. And he got really butthurt when Jaime pulled up that anti-weed article from Crowders own website. Crowder does care about weed, but is pretending not to care--he is a hypocrite. I don't like people who don't have the courage of their convictions.

>he read
it was an article on crowder's website

Fair enough, but he didn't bring up just any article, he brought up the article from his own site that one of his writers wrote, which was pointed out as being completely one sided and flat out incorrect. He even tried harping on Jamie being there in the first place since Jamie was making him look like a moron by disputing everything he said as garbage. That and the fact Joe was in an awful mood made him uncomfortable.

Crowler once said in the infamous Titus debate that 'Japan has no freedom of speech laws!". If someone had been there looking up facts, they would have been able to point out he's flat out wrong. Perfect example of him using bullshit to steamroll over people.

thanks

True, Joe went looking for something in Crowler's opinions that would strike a nerve and spark an arguement. But he only did this because he was in a pissy mood.
But Crowler was being his usual dumbass cringy self. If better guest had been there it would have actually been a good show.

It was pointed out "hahahaha the AAA you can't trust them hahahaha"

Then the first random article Jamie pulled up was treated as gospel

muh leave it up to the states is the biggest conservative weasler in the world. It's essentially concern-trolling.

Crowder is surprisingly thin-skinned. I guess, it's because he was a typical Chad in school, he never got bullied himself--he probably did the bullying. So he's a classic example of a person who can ditch it out, but can't take it.

>Crowder: "uh I guess like whatevr I have no argument, and I'm 100% but let's just say you won (even though you didn't) and move on"
>Rogan: "I don't really think that's fair. You're clearly afraid to admit that you're wrong.
>Crowder: "Dude what the fuck man I said you win! You win the argument! I'm still right, but let's just say you win, and move on? You're obviously wrong, and I'm not going to tell you why or argue any points, but you're wrong and I'm right. But I'll give you this one. You win. Now let's move on.

Why would anyone side with Crowder here?

He's just cringy and awkward. His little comments and stupid acts are hard to watch and listen to.

At least they sourced their article, Crowder just spews random bullshit.

Rogan has choked people he's had disareements with before

Crowder should try to get Ben Shapiro on Joe Rogan's show.

Ben would tear him apart.

Ben is autistic and has no idea how to argue. He's on the same tier as Destiny.

At some point you have to ask yourself if and why you just need to convince someone in something even if that person stands in "I have my thoughts but I'd rather not talk about it" kind of stance.

You have to be in that middle space to have productive argument. Crowler clearly didn't engage enough.

I've tried pot several times. And I would say, 3/4 times it is more unpleasant than joyful. And I definitely challenge the idea that it doesn't impair driving. Sativa strains work like PCP in my head. I'm literally hallucinating on that shit. If you put me behind the wheel, then I would definitely kill someone.

Rogan is only lucky because there isn't a method to detect pot intoxication yet. So without detection, then how are you going to establish casuality in driving fatalities/accidents?

Didn't he play Brain in Arthur?

Why the fuck should I care what he thinks about politics

Ben knows how to argue like a lawyer, but most people don't argue like lawyers in real life. He comes off as some asperg sociopath sometimes. I don't see him holding a long forum conversation.

>low hanging fruit vs. dude libertarianism n weed lmao
why would anyone watch this?

the problem is, Crowder brought it up. And he argued about it until he got completely BTFO by facts, and then whined about Rogan using facts, and acted like a butthurt little faggot by saying "let's just agree to disagree". No, sorry. You wanted to play with the big dogs and lost. Now accept your defeat like an adult.

Crowder had an argument, though. He showed marijuana use has consequences and that he dislikes the rhetoric used by those in favor of legalizing it for medicinal use.

Rogan didn't understand what he was saying from the outset. He sperged out when confronted with one statistical study, claiming it was illegitimate because of the "Bilderberg Group". I get that he was drunk and high, but he acted like a real dick. Crowder was justified in calling him a bully.

even in your wildest fantasies you are a loser with a wide open schedule with no engagements.

Im sure this goes both ways. There is no reason to start flinging shit.

Crowder is just an insecure beta. Rogan did literally nothing wrong.

>And he argued about it until he got completely BTFO by facts
Please. Crowder could have gone in for the killing blow. Rogan's "facts" were out of date, limited in scope (focusing only on Colorado), and from less trustworthy sources.

>then whined about Rogan using facts
He complained about how difficult it is to have an impromptu debate on an issue he doesn't care about with one person and a fact checker pretending to be impartial. That and how Rogan was being a cunt.

>i don't have the facts here with me
>here's the laptop, get them
>B-BUT panic.jpeg

>hey pussy
>shut up fuck face
>aww, adorable
>hey honey
>"What?! We're just friends right?"

In addition to that, he pressured Crowder into a 40 minute debate only to end up fucking agreeing with him anyway.

>le Crowder defener

lmao fuck off cuck. Based Rogan DESTROYED your hero's tiny little white butthole using facts and logic. Stay mad, virgin.

>here's my recent statistical study from a triple A group that analyses the full picture
>NO BUT BILDERBERG GROUP YOU CANT TRUST IT

Rogan didn't destroy anything except for his reputation. From the video, you honestly get the feeling he was a bully during high school.

honestly from this conversation, I get the feeling you got bullied in high school, because you were such an easy target and a whiny little bitch.

Why does Joe have to smoke to relieve boredom? Doesn't he know that having fun isn't hard when you have a library card!

>listerning to crowder

you tell those liberal snowflakes you smart non-beta cucks republican chads

the worst thing is that Crowder prides himself on being open and changing his mind while sitting in his own studio with his factcheckers so it's fun to see the tables turn on him and him not being able to handle it.

>hallucinating
>PCP
nah mate.

I listened to alot of podcasts, this was one of the few where he really loses control and attacks the guest.

He had Milo on his show telling him that Christianity is the reason for anything good that exists in society and there was only a mild reaction. A guest talks critically about weed? Full on 'Hey Fuck face WERE FRIENDS" mode.

Milo was right though

This is the guy who think global warming is a hoax, right?

>Should murder be legal?

>No, but I don't really care.

>So you're ok with murder?

>No, of course not. I just don't think it's that important FOR ME personally

>...so you're ok with it.

>Listen, Joe, don't be so aggressive, I'm not saying I want to murder you, ok? I just think we should leave it to the states.

yep, he continuously mistakes weather and air pollution with global warming too and thinks is a liberal plot take out your liberties.

A retard, plain and simple.

Crowder please, fuck off.

Nah, Ben will do and say whatever is needed to win an argument, and if that's not enough he'll twist the facts, say half truths, ignore the parts of the other person's arguments that he can't refute, and then if that's not enough he'll go with a wide sample of fallacies, etc.

In the end he wins because arguing against someone like him requires a judge in the middle with full authority and zero patience towards dirty play, the average moderator can't do that, but in a court he'll be destroyed in minutes; judges love to humiliate that kind of guys.

>mfw someone says they don't smoke weed every day