The anti-Trump/pro-Harris people are all saying that Sam annihilated Scott. The pro-Trump/Adams people are all saying that Scott annihilated Sam.

No they aren't. I think Sam, Scott and MOST PEOPLE THAT LISTENED TO THE PODCAST would view this episode as a conversation where the views of Scott were partially explored NOT a debate where there would even be a possible winner.

Does that mean nobody thinks that Sam destroyed Scott or vice versa? Of course not, there are lots of people that wanted a contest of ideas with a clear winner that isn't what they should have been expecting and that is definitely not was was delivered.

Those people calling out a clear winner I would argue are a MINORITY of the total people listening to the podcast. Minority as in less than 50%. Not sure what the exact breakdown as but I would be willing to be that more than 50% of the listenership do not view this podcast as a debate or argument where one person prevailed over the other.

Regardless its not 'all'.... this is the Sam Harris subreddit. I know Sam is not perfect and he fully admits that he got a little hyperbolic in the episode (not really that I could tell beyond the comedic moments) but please please trying NOT to be hyperbolic. Its not hard to simply drop 'all' when making claims like you have and simply say some.

In fact replacing all with some when discussing virtually anything is usually a safe move when the goal is to be closer to the truth.