Yes, I'm seeing a lot of mileage being got out of the line that "his only mission was to debate".
It's not true, of course.
There are organisations whose sole purpose is to debate: toastmaster's clubs, Cambridge Union, etc. If you ask what the political position of any of these organisations is on climate change, or the trinitarian nature of a Christian god, they will look at you blankly – because they do not have a position. Their job genuinely is to facilitate debate by folk who do take positions.
Turning Point USA is a proselytising organisation. It has beliefs and positions, and it exists to propagate those beliefs and positions.
I haven't had much time to research this, but from what I've seen, it uses a variety of formats to proselytise. One format is essentially pulpit preaching (Kirk's podcast show). Another format is "debates", which are akin to push-polling.
From what I've seen so far, it's been very slickly done. Even the choice of "Prove me wrong" as a slogan is clever. It arouses the superficial feeling that this is an open discussion. But the moment you pay a bit more attention, you realise much of what Kirk was saying was not fact-based (indeed he repeated stuff in defiance of facts), but belief-based. And belief-based stuff isn't really susceptible of being proved wrong.
Eg If you say, "I believe god wants you to wear pink socks," then it is quite true that you believe this. I can't prove that you don't. But conversely you can't prove that god actually does want me to wear pink socks. Fortunately, you've set it up with the slogan "prove me wrong", so that the onus is on me to do the proving.
It's very clever.