Adam Mockler, a left-wing commentator and contributor to the progressive MeidasTouch media company, appeared on Jubilee's Surrounded to argue that Donald Trump's presidency did not represent a "golden age" for the American economy.
What followed was a seven-minute exchange with College Republican Martin that ended with Mockler smiling and conceding twice that he was wrong.
Watch and enjoy the whole thing here:
It's tough to know the precise moment when the wheels came off for Mockler. From the start, he struggled defending the tired claim that the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act "disproportionately benefits the richest of the rich."
Martin didn't argue vibes. He argued numbers.
Sixty percent of income earners actually do get tax cuts under the One Big Beautiful Bill -- under the extension of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Specifically the median American family would have seen a tax hike of $1,800 a year should the tax cuts have expired.
The point landed immediately and had the other participants nodding in agreement.
Mockler pivoted straight into the exchange that broke the debate.
Arguing that Trump-era Medicaid work requirements harmed vulnerable people by removing "social safety nets," Mockler pointed to Arkansas, where he claimed 18,000 people were "kicked off" Medicaid due to increased "barriers."
Martin didn't answer back with statistics or dispute the number. He disputed the explanation:
What are the barriers?
Mockler fumbled his response so Martin didn't let up.
What are the barriers?
Mockler repeated the claim - barriers existed - but was still unable to name one. So Martin narrowed the frame:
The only barrier we've talked about is a 20-hour work requirement. There are already exemptions for disability. So what are the barriers?
At this point, Mockler was stuck in a loop, asserting the existence of obstacles without ever identifying them. That's when Martin delivered the quiet knockout:
Can we concede that work requirements are a good thing?
Mockler stammered and then conceded, "You got me. That was good, you got me."
In this short exchange, Martin executed a simple but effective strategy:
Forced a vague moral claim into a concrete policy discussion
Exposed that the argument relied on undefined abstractions
Secured agreement on the very principle Mockler had been criticizing
This was less a debate win than a controlled demolition.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
