Today we have a Guest Post by young Doom, himself. A debate-warrior with the twenty-something crowd, I’ve asked him to write down some of the tricks of the trade that make him so successful.
How to Argue A Liberal
A guide to taking on, and beating, a liberal in any arena, public or private (especially in front of the liberal media).
After becoming increasingly aggravated and ashamed with the continual losses that conservatives have been suffering, and the general direction that the country is taking, I decided to do some research, and put together my thoughts on various concepts that seem to be plaguing our debating/arguing capability.
I developed his guide to be used when confronted with, and outnumbered or outmaneuvered by a liberal opponent (or group of them) who is unwilling to see or respond to logical arguments. Or if you’re a guest on a liberal media outlet.
DISCLAIMER: Please use this guide with caution, as continued exposure to these tactics may degrade one’s sense of morality.
Now that that’s out of the way, let’s get you armed! I have made this guide in sections according to what seem to be the most used techniques, and in what would be the most appropriate order to approach this style of debating/arguing.
1: “Fair Play”
This concept comes from a mutual respect for one’s opponent, their right to think as an individual, be their own unique self, and is something usually taught in kindergarten. However, a Liberal Has no respect for anyone who does not agree completely with their world/universe point-of-view. They therefore have no use for, or concept of, fair play. This gives them the ability to rationalize anything they do as necessary, and as it means they win, Necessary=Right.
Now, after watching more political crap (media) than I care to admit, and doing a considerable amount of historical research, I have come to the conclusion that the most effective way to deal with this type of arguer, is to fight on their level.
Doing this will probably make you feel a little nauseated, AND IT SHOULD; but while constrained by honor, respect, and decency, you will be coming from a position that cannot be defended. As unfortunate as it is, if you adhere to the concept of “Fair”, YOU WILL LOSE….BADLY!!
Ex: Using minutes more than allowed in debates (liberals), and then cry-assing when a conservative finishes one second late. Constant interruptions, and shouting when they don’t get their way.
While it may be in your nature to feel some sort of pity for your opponent, for using these tactics against them, your opponent will not have the same reservations, and will in fact, expect you to reciprocate. Showing pity, care for your opponents sensibilities, or shame for having to fight on this level, are all deadly mistakes. Your opponent will seize the opportunity, and exploit your weakness.
3: “Glamour Effect”
Do not go into an argument or debate thinking that your opponent will argue using any recognizable form of logic or reason. if possible, they will drag you out of the realm of what is “real”, and into their own twisted version of reality. What you need to do, is figure out how they are trying to accomplish the task, and redirect it toward an arena that is more even, or at least beneficial to you.
This is a favorite in the liberal arsenal. Since your opponent will likely be aware that their argument cannot be won on merit, they will seek to destroy YOU by any means necessary (see rule 1). It’s basically, “if I can’t make my argument look better, then I’ll make yours look worse”. What they are counting on you not to realize, is that it works Both ways.
Now, your opponent is likely going to be better at this than you, and that’s OK, because the “facts” supporting their smear/character assassination of you, are (generally) not going to stand up to the ones used by you against them. The only way to effectively combat this in any sort of timely manner, is in kind.
To do so, you must find any kind of fault or possible source of conflicting, scandalous, or hypocritical material in their background, or the background of those around them, and present the facts with the worst possible connotations that you can manage. The goal here is to make the audience actively Hate your opponent merely for the crime of existing.
It doesn’t matter how much crap gets thrown at you; as long as you end up on top, you will have the opportunity to go into “damage-control” mode.
In order to mitigate potential damage from this type of attack, it is helpful to have rebuttals ready for all scenarios that you think your opponent may try to use against you. However, given the relatively large number of possible angles of attack, it may be simpler/more effective to just open up with both barrels, and hope for the best.
This technique has the added Bonus effect of making the target “toxic” to others of their party, since affiliation would mean being vulnerable to the same type of assault.
Ex: George Bush being mocked for being a “C-average” president. Mocking any conservative for being openly Christian. Mocking conservatives for being patriotic (or anyone for that matter).
Your opponent, whoever they are, is going to change the subject any time you would be able to strike at one of their key arguments. This can be used to identify what those arguments are, and then systematically destroy them. The tactic is used by both sides, but conservatives generally suck at it… hardcore.
Too many examples! Watch any presidential/congressional debate.
6: “Character Assassination”
This could be considered part of “4”, but I felt it merited its own section, on account of its widespread use, and its kill ratio. A liberal will do everything in their power Not to have to face you head-on. Instead, they will come at you indirectly, attacking your credibility, or family/community ties.
The process for dealing with this tactic, is the same as for #4. First, you must be constantly ready and able to withstand ridicule for anything and everything that someone may find offensive in any way. Next, you must be willing to go into the past of your opponent, and their friends, family, community, state, and any organizations that were even associated by proximity (socially or geographically), dig through them, and find anything that could be used to make them look bad. Even if it is something that is not directly related, it can be Made to Look relevant.
If the ammunition in question is something private, and not normally shared with the public, all-the-better, because it will cause more of a scandal. This tactic relies on the user’s ability to temporarily suppress their own morality (see disclaimer), and bring upon themselves the will to publicly damage another person for no better reason than they, at one time, didn’t actively harm your (liberal) opponent.
I said this in number 1, and I will say it again. This tactic probably makes you ill, just thinking about it, but that is normal. It just shows that you still have a functioning moral center.
Ex: Sarah Palin taking heat for opposing abortion and being Christian, while having a child with down syndrome.
7: “Logic Vs. Emotion”
Any liberal argument will by its nature be light on factual evidence, or have doctored/spun evidence to support it. To compensate for this, a liberal will instead resort to making their argument into a story intended to elicit an emotional response from their audience. This has the advantage of being able to Override the logic center of their audience’s brain, and making them more susceptible to thinking what the liberal wants them to.
When using this tactic, it is important to remember that both positive and negative emotions can work for you if used correctly; make sure that your arguments elicit the correct emotions for the situation.
Ex: Can anyone say “Global Warming”. Saying the conservative is “being mean, vindictive, a bigot, racist” when they say something that would counter a key point in a liberal argument.
8: “Argument Bombardment”
This is a favorite with liberals who have mastered the previous rules, especially #3 through #7. With this tactic, it may not be necessary for a person to lie, since it relies on throwing as many details as possible into an argument, in story form, and as quickly as possible. The only known way to combat this is to be able to systematically counter every point raised, in a similar, rapid-fire-story fashion.
This means, making an argument that tells a story, includes as many facts/ideas as possible, making sure that all of those little bits singularly and wholly elicit as strong an emotional response as possible.
This technique is only usable if one has the ability to make their voice attractive to listen to, or at the very least, impossible to ignore, without yelling. It can be a difficult skill to learn, but is a powerful weapon once mastered.
Parents: you will have a bit of an advantage in this field, assuming you figured out how to get your child/children to listen to you for an extended period of time. Liberals think like children, and their attention will be held in much the same way.
Examples of this would be too long to post here, and would not provide enough information to be useful. You will just have to learn for yourself.
9: “Flat-Out Lying”
This is NOT a recommended tactic since you will undoubtedly be called out on it; it is just something that I have noticed conservatives seem to be naively unaware of. A liberal arguer WILL LIE if they believe they may not get caught, or that it will be too late to do anything about it. They must be caught, and called on it within moments, or your chance will most likely be lost.
NOTE: This technique appears last not because of its frequency of use, but because of the ill-advised nature of using it.
Ex: “I did not have $#x with that woman”, “Global Warming”, “spend our way out of debt”, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, the IRS scandal, the Benghazi incident, “Obamacare”.
While using these techniques can be useful, calling a liberal out for using them can be equally as useful. Just like that kid that burnt ants with a magnifying glass on the playground, every time they try to move to another position, move with them, keep the light cranked right up, and eventually they will get too burnt to keep going.