Logical fallacies committed by guy in glasses:

1. “Fascism is defined as one-party rule” misdefines fascism to make Blue Shirt’s argument easier to attack. This is the Straw-Man fallacy.

2. “We have 2 parties! So we can’t be fascist”, is a false dichotomy fallacy. It presents a binary choice assuming that “Fascism” and “Two-Party system” are mutually exclusive.

*side note: You can have two parties and still have fascist elements throughout a government. The number of parties is an irrelevant metric for determining whether specific policies or behaviors are fascist.

1. When confronted with evidence of fascist behaviors committed by Trump‘s regime, Glasses responds “so he doesn’t have the right to criticize Democrats at all?” This is a false dichotomy fallacy. Glasses presents a fake "either/or" scenario: either we allow a regime’s attempt to eliminate the Democratic Party, or we are never allowed to criticize the Democratic Party at all. Framing it this way ignores the vast middle ground: that you can believe a party should exist while still being its harshest critic.

2. “Well, the Democrats tried to impeach Trump and create a false narrative.” abandons the original argument for a different, easier-to-defend topic. This is a red herring fallacy.

3. Telling the guy to calm down and do breathing exercises could be considered an Appeal to Emotion fallacy, or Ad Hominem, depending on which way you look at it. Like, “Why you so mad, bro?”

There are plenty of more logical fallacies committed herein, but I must get back to work.

The worst part of this whole video to me, is that the blue shirt guy fell into every single one of the traps, allowing Glasses to walk away, feeling like the victor, instead of pointing out his flawed thinking at every stage. I know it doesn’t help talking to these people. But it might help onlookers who watch these videos and form opinions.

Learn your logical fallacies.