Rav, Dave was demolished by Coleman. Dave's intentional failure to either read and/or absorb history (e.g., what happened in 1922 in the Middle East? What was the Mufti's relationship with the Third Reich?) makes him a rolling punchline. At least he's good for comic relief I suppose.
People like myself get tired of listening to any jerk with a microphone spouting off about matters that require reading and investigation and some knowledge of history and even the intricacies of law if they are going to talk about matters involving law. I believe that is what Douglas Murray was getting at. In the short comment of substance shown in the clip above Dave Smith dismisses out of hand the argument that Israel did not want reporters in Gaza because it could not protect their safety. The Israeli explanation is a perfect valid argument because if any reporters were shot and killed, their colleagues would immediately jump on Israel and blame it for their deaths as they have done countless times in the past, ignoring the FACT that many journalists are simply Hamas spokespeople or stringers in their pay. This has been shown to be true time and time again, not to mention that in a war zone the risks taken by reporters are their responsibility but they do not assume that. The war in Gaza with Israeli hostages held God knows where was difficult enough without Israel's having to worry about journalists roaming around. And unlike the Palestinians, Israel does value human life, even that of their enemies who deserve nothing but the destruction they sow everywhere they can.
"...one where independent commentators rise purely through strong argumentation, not institutional backing or elite credential"
I don't think Dave's argumentation is particularly strong. For starters he holds contradicting evidence to a very high standard that seems to cause him to dismiss nearly all of it, while holding confirming evidence to no such standard.
When he starts talking about military matters he is egregiously deep into dunning-kruger territory.
Finally, as can be seen in his conversations with Konstatin Kisin, he has a maddeningly common habit of not answering direct questions. Example, "If you disagree so much with Israel's response to Oct 7, what do you think would've been a more appropriate response" ...followed by talking about anything else than what he would consider a proper response before hand waving to some vague special forces response.
I suspect Murray feels that Dave is committed to motivated reasoning to support his biases, and so has stopped trying to take him seriously.
Stopping taking Dave seriously is precisely correct. Rav needs to exhibit some humility and evaluate his continued interaction with Dave by asking the question "where exactly are we going with this conversation.?"
Murray is right but using poor tactics. Smith is wrong but has been given open goals to shoot at because Murray is using logical fallacies. I think Murray has been excellent morally and Smith is despicable, but I have been dismayed at how poorly Murray has performed whenever he talks to or about Smith. It’s the snob in Murray. He doesn’t take Smith seriously as an opponent which is understandable given that Smith knows very little, but you can’t turn up with just smugness and condescension. That hands the win to Smith. Murray needs to deal with such people better by laying out the actual history.
Tweets Where Dave Smith Dismisses or Insults Others
Based on a comprehensive search of Dave Smith’s recent X posts (focusing on the past year up to November 17, 2025), he routinely employs insults like “clown,” “stupid,” “dumb,” “retard,” “fraud,” “hack,” “moron,” “bitch,” “fuck,” and “neocon monster” to critique politicians, commentators, and public figures. His rhetoric is unapologetically combative, often targeting neocons, media personalities, and those he views as warmongers or intellectually dishonest. Below is a curated list of notable examples (sorted chronologically, most recent first). These represent a sample of 30+ relevant posts; full threads and contexts are available via the post IDs for deeper review. I’ve highlighted the key insult(s) in bold for clarity.
• October 29, 2025 [Post ID: 1983640201474785423]: Dismissing Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) as irrelevant after a critical article on Tucker Carlson. “Also, who the fuck is Josh to decide who ought to be neutralized? … Josh has not been elected to anything and has zero popular support. Josh is known for being friends with Charlie and getting smoked in a debate with me twice. That’s it.”
• October 20, 2025 [Post ID: 1980392071166062883]: Calling out Nathan Livingstone (@TheMilkBarTV) for misunderstanding logical fallacies. “Yeah, see, this is the problem- you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about. … If you don’t get this, you should be quiet.”
• October 14, 2025 [Post ID: 1978185796822708580]: Labeling Steven Crowder’s arguments as “painfully stupid.” “Ok I watched. It’s painfully stupid. I don’t address Crowder but I tore apart this dumb ‘why aren’t you celebrating’ nonsense…”
• October 11, 2025 [Post ID: 1976827279415427273]: Accusing Gummi (@gummibear737) of psychopathy over Gaza comments. “Also, who the fuck celebrates at the end of a genocide? What type of psychotic shit is this?”
• September 29, 2025 [Post ID: 1972672696954548371]: Telling Ashton Forbes (@JustXAshton) he’d look “stupid” in a debate. “Right. If I challenged you to a debate on physics, I would look as stupid as you do right now.”
• September 27, 2025 [Post ID: 1971952353730613607]: Calling James Lindsay’s (@ConceptualJames) “woke right” definition “incredibly stupid.” “Oh I know that you’ve defined it, your definition is just incredibly stupid. That’s why I challenged you to debate it and you, wisely, ran away. You’ve blown your entire reputation on this nonsense…”
• August 28, 2025 [Post ID: 1961057811623813429]: General dismissal of politicizers as “lazy, stupid.” “All of the attempts to immediately politicize these horrific mass shootings are lazy, stupid and wrong.”
• August 17, 2025 [Post ID: 1957081956350325165]: Branding Zelensky a “corrupt fraud.” “There is something particularly disgusting about this little corrupt fraud making demands of us…”
• August 13, 2025 [Post ID: 1955630278032167187]: Calling libertarian takes on public parks “painfully stupid.” “It is painfully stupid and worse, it signals ideological capture…”
Douglas's showing on Rogan was prophetic. He saw the Nazis in the woke right for who they are and called them out on it. His only problem was that he was early.
Dave, on the other hand- coddles evil and objectively disgusting people like Nick Fuentes in the name of "Debate", while never actually doing so.
Others are right, saying Dave is a clown is an insult to clowns.
Your judgement is poor in continuing to waste time with Dave.
Douglas's showing on Rogan was frankly humiliating. I went in with an open mind, I can assure you. Douglas failed to provide any meaningful substantive arguments against Dave in that debate and his podcast tour after talking about Dave.
I'm not endorsing all of Dave's views by any stretch, just noticing Douglas' fallacious attempts to undermine Dave as a mere clown.
Douglas's lackluster performance in the conversation /debate, whatever you want to call it, was due to him dismissing Dave's legitimacy as a pundit.
At the time, I considered it rude.
Now, it's clear that Douglas saw something evil from way further off with regard to the woke right provocateurs and called them out to Joe, which was honestly the right call, and more important than arguing with Dave.
Dave's since been shown to be a clown by Coleman Hughes and Konstantin Kisin.
Good grief - Dave Smith is the biggest uneducated fake clown. To call him a clown is to insult actual clowns...
Thanks for this comment.
Rav, Dave was demolished by Coleman. Dave's intentional failure to either read and/or absorb history (e.g., what happened in 1922 in the Middle East? What was the Mufti's relationship with the Third Reich?) makes him a rolling punchline. At least he's good for comic relief I suppose.
Douglas Murray is the moral compass of our time. Surprised that you took Dave Smith’s side.
Douglas embarrassed himself in that debate on Rogan, sorry. That doesn't mean I'm endorsing all of Dave's views by any means.
People like myself get tired of listening to any jerk with a microphone spouting off about matters that require reading and investigation and some knowledge of history and even the intricacies of law if they are going to talk about matters involving law. I believe that is what Douglas Murray was getting at. In the short comment of substance shown in the clip above Dave Smith dismisses out of hand the argument that Israel did not want reporters in Gaza because it could not protect their safety. The Israeli explanation is a perfect valid argument because if any reporters were shot and killed, their colleagues would immediately jump on Israel and blame it for their deaths as they have done countless times in the past, ignoring the FACT that many journalists are simply Hamas spokespeople or stringers in their pay. This has been shown to be true time and time again, not to mention that in a war zone the risks taken by reporters are their responsibility but they do not assume that. The war in Gaza with Israeli hostages held God knows where was difficult enough without Israel's having to worry about journalists roaming around. And unlike the Palestinians, Israel does value human life, even that of their enemies who deserve nothing but the destruction they sow everywhere they can.
"...one where independent commentators rise purely through strong argumentation, not institutional backing or elite credential"
I don't think Dave's argumentation is particularly strong. For starters he holds contradicting evidence to a very high standard that seems to cause him to dismiss nearly all of it, while holding confirming evidence to no such standard.
When he starts talking about military matters he is egregiously deep into dunning-kruger territory.
Finally, as can be seen in his conversations with Konstatin Kisin, he has a maddeningly common habit of not answering direct questions. Example, "If you disagree so much with Israel's response to Oct 7, what do you think would've been a more appropriate response" ...followed by talking about anything else than what he would consider a proper response before hand waving to some vague special forces response.
I suspect Murray feels that Dave is committed to motivated reasoning to support his biases, and so has stopped trying to take him seriously.
Stopping taking Dave seriously is precisely correct. Rav needs to exhibit some humility and evaluate his continued interaction with Dave by asking the question "where exactly are we going with this conversation.?"
Murray is right but using poor tactics. Smith is wrong but has been given open goals to shoot at because Murray is using logical fallacies. I think Murray has been excellent morally and Smith is despicable, but I have been dismayed at how poorly Murray has performed whenever he talks to or about Smith. It’s the snob in Murray. He doesn’t take Smith seriously as an opponent which is understandable given that Smith knows very little, but you can’t turn up with just smugness and condescension. That hands the win to Smith. Murray needs to deal with such people better by laying out the actual history.
Tweets Where Dave Smith Dismisses or Insults Others
Based on a comprehensive search of Dave Smith’s recent X posts (focusing on the past year up to November 17, 2025), he routinely employs insults like “clown,” “stupid,” “dumb,” “retard,” “fraud,” “hack,” “moron,” “bitch,” “fuck,” and “neocon monster” to critique politicians, commentators, and public figures. His rhetoric is unapologetically combative, often targeting neocons, media personalities, and those he views as warmongers or intellectually dishonest. Below is a curated list of notable examples (sorted chronologically, most recent first). These represent a sample of 30+ relevant posts; full threads and contexts are available via the post IDs for deeper review. I’ve highlighted the key insult(s) in bold for clarity.
• October 29, 2025 [Post ID: 1983640201474785423]: Dismissing Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) as irrelevant after a critical article on Tucker Carlson. “Also, who the fuck is Josh to decide who ought to be neutralized? … Josh has not been elected to anything and has zero popular support. Josh is known for being friends with Charlie and getting smoked in a debate with me twice. That’s it.”
• October 20, 2025 [Post ID: 1980392071166062883]: Calling out Nathan Livingstone (@TheMilkBarTV) for misunderstanding logical fallacies. “Yeah, see, this is the problem- you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about. … If you don’t get this, you should be quiet.”
• October 14, 2025 [Post ID: 1978185796822708580]: Labeling Steven Crowder’s arguments as “painfully stupid.” “Ok I watched. It’s painfully stupid. I don’t address Crowder but I tore apart this dumb ‘why aren’t you celebrating’ nonsense…”
• October 11, 2025 [Post ID: 1976827279415427273]: Accusing Gummi (@gummibear737) of psychopathy over Gaza comments. “Also, who the fuck celebrates at the end of a genocide? What type of psychotic shit is this?”
• September 29, 2025 [Post ID: 1972672696954548371]: Telling Ashton Forbes (@JustXAshton) he’d look “stupid” in a debate. “Right. If I challenged you to a debate on physics, I would look as stupid as you do right now.”
• September 27, 2025 [Post ID: 1971952353730613607]: Calling James Lindsay’s (@ConceptualJames) “woke right” definition “incredibly stupid.” “Oh I know that you’ve defined it, your definition is just incredibly stupid. That’s why I challenged you to debate it and you, wisely, ran away. You’ve blown your entire reputation on this nonsense…”
• August 28, 2025 [Post ID: 1961057811623813429]: General dismissal of politicizers as “lazy, stupid.” “All of the attempts to immediately politicize these horrific mass shootings are lazy, stupid and wrong.”
• August 17, 2025 [Post ID: 1957081956350325165]: Branding Zelensky a “corrupt fraud.” “There is something particularly disgusting about this little corrupt fraud making demands of us…”
• August 13, 2025 [Post ID: 1955630278032167187]: Calling libertarian takes on public parks “painfully stupid.” “It is painfully stupid and worse, it signals ideological capture…”
Douglas's showing on Rogan was prophetic. He saw the Nazis in the woke right for who they are and called them out on it. His only problem was that he was early.
Dave, on the other hand- coddles evil and objectively disgusting people like Nick Fuentes in the name of "Debate", while never actually doing so.
Others are right, saying Dave is a clown is an insult to clowns.
Your judgement is poor in continuing to waste time with Dave.
Douglas's showing on Rogan was frankly humiliating. I went in with an open mind, I can assure you. Douglas failed to provide any meaningful substantive arguments against Dave in that debate and his podcast tour after talking about Dave.
I'm not endorsing all of Dave's views by any stretch, just noticing Douglas' fallacious attempts to undermine Dave as a mere clown.
Douglas's lackluster performance in the conversation /debate, whatever you want to call it, was due to him dismissing Dave's legitimacy as a pundit.
At the time, I considered it rude.
Now, it's clear that Douglas saw something evil from way further off with regard to the woke right provocateurs and called them out to Joe, which was honestly the right call, and more important than arguing with Dave.
Dave's since been shown to be a clown by Coleman Hughes and Konstantin Kisin.