When the debate is dumbed down to sound bites this is true. When the discussion is thoughtful and interested in finding truth, the person making a point should try to define his terms enough for people to recognize what he is saying, but not be required to digress as a means of distracting from his point.
Rather if his point of view is wrong, counter arguments should give a valid reason, rather than try to wrestle with him semantically.
Where in either theory is there anything that precludes the other?
ID speculates about the origin of life. Evolution speculates about how it behaves in response to environmental changes.
I can find nothing in the theory of evolution that says in cannot be by design, and nothing in the theory of intelligent design that says it cannot have been designed to evolve.
The entire debate appears to be an exercise in abusing and misrepresenting both theories as proxies over differences of opinion about something else.