WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

341

Informative? Yes. 100.0000% in denial about masks? Yes. A provacatoor? Absolutely.

Last couple episodes I just turned it off. I'm realizing he sells fear.

Informative? Yes. 100.0000% in denial about masks? Yes. A provacatoor? Absolutely. Last couple episodes I just turned it off. I'm realizing he sells fear.

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

I don't know enough about him to get into all of what you said, but I will say that "Being a fence sitter" has it's place. It's valuable and important to be able to understand why the other side believes what they do. If you're talking to someone who has zero opinions about politics and you're not capable of presenting a persuasive argument for why the other guy believes what they do then you're probably not very well equipped to defend your own beliefs.

There's only so much that you can learn about the other peoples beliefs from someone who is 100% on the other side like your average msnbc commentator. Fence sitters who look at an analyze the reasonable parts of both sides help to fill in those gaps. They also are useful to people who aren't experienced with political issues to show them the process for dissecting an issue, considering the evidence, and reasoning their way to a position on an issue that they feel is the right one to support. You don't usually get that kind of analyses from people who are already far in one camp or another because they tend to preach to people who share their views. They focus on propping up those who agree and criticizing those who disagree. Like look at Jimmy Dore, he is a bernie-style leftist who mostly focuses on criticizing democrats. He does not spend much time discussing his reasoning for his beliefs, only his reasoning for his criticisms of other democrats.

[–] 0 pt

I don't know enough about him to get into all of what you said, but I will say that "Being a fence sitter" has it's place.

I can assume you mean "being one while information is still coming in" right?

and that once information is done coming in about a subject and there is sufficient information to draw a conclusion, then fence sitting time is over right?

Tim is a perpetual fence sitter, i've watched him long enough to go from being happy someone new in the world of "journalism" came on the scene, when he was talking about doing actual on scene reporting again, to being disgusted by the sound of his voice...that doesn't happen because of "one instance" of anything except maybe child abuse.

he got donations to help get a "van" set up all nice so he could do in the field reporting...well before covid that went away and now he just sits and fence sits all day

i've been done with him for awhile now

[–] 0 pt

Well it's a matter of what he talks about and focuses on. If you make videos and your objective is to be a guy who talks about current events using the information that is available and discusses how you understand the news topics and how you are going to analyze the information and use/interpret it to influence your thoughts about what is happening, then you are not going to devote much time to hammering away on subjects where you have already made up your mind about things. That's fine it's just a different focus. There are already plenty of people who make videos where they've already made up their minds about things and the focus of their video is to drive home the opinions that they've reached.

I don't know if you've ever gotten interest in financial news, but I'll use Jim Cramer (of Mad Money) as an example. I haven't watched him in like 5 or 10 years, but he would talk about the stock market in general, he'd analyze a few individual stocks in detail, give his opinion about them, and explain his reasoning, and he'd also have a segment where he'd give like rapid-fire responses to callers asking about whether he thinks a particular stock is a good buy. His critics would always bitch about how he didn't have a great track record with his stock picks but that wasn't really the point. There are plenty of other stock-picking shows out there and he wasn't trying to do that. The goal of his show and where it was valuable was to explain his reasoning and teach people things that would better equip them to make their own decisions.

When I say that "fence-sitters have their place" what I mean is that it's valuable to have someone who does that in regards to politics. People need to be able to decipher the news and analyze issues based on their own values so that they can think for themselves and reach their own conclusions about things. I don't know if Tim Pool is necessarily that kind of a person. I expect that anyone who is that kind of a person would be criticized for being "a fence sitter" though. If I ever started a news show I think that is the type of thing that I'd do because it's an underserved niche, and it's also a very valuable way to present true facts that the normie news wants to bury and ignore.

[–] 0 pt

too much attempt to justify a simple problem, hello jew