They also resort to ad-hominem attacks, and change the subject frequently.
I go with Alinsky. A liberals biggest fear is being humiliated. I have humiliating a liberal down to an art form. And when the liberal whines about it, I humiliate him that he is a whiner.
Communists, who frequently masquerade as “liberals,” frequently redefine terms, both overtly and covertly, to skew discussions in their favor.
They will refuse to accept the wrong-doings of their politicians or try to avoid it by bringing up some example of a Republican doing the same thing.
You (or someone) should make this into a Bingo type graphic to post at the begining of the arguement so others can play Liberal Debate Bingo while watching.
Good stuff so far.....I can see fine tuning this.
You meant to say 'cite', yes?
This is one variation of The Delphi Technique.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/pdf/FallaciesPoster24x36.pdf
better- hit them in the mouth
best- shoot them in the head
They cannot tell you what the other side of any political argument is without snark. Seriously, they don't know what the other side of the argument is.
These tactics are often engaged - not just with liberals - but amongst ourselves where ar FR. We’ve all seen others engage in them and we all know who is winning/losing the debate and the replies fly back and forth
I’ve engaged others using these tactics. Sometimes ya win. Sometimes ya lose. Sometimes you are right. Sometimes not. But these tactics do work in establishing a winning strategy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
• Will not answer your questions
• Will insist that I answer your questions
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ahh, the questions. Oftentimes the losing side will focus on straw-man questions; irrelevant questions; and other non-essential questions that do nothing but deflect from the topic at hand.
Its aggravating to answer them and/or ignore them. And when they reufuse to answer the direct yes or no questions on the table that would prove you right, I find it best to restate that the points have been made and move on.
Oh, and let them have the last word or insult. It goes without saying that name calling is indeed the last resort of losers and whiners.
I ask, in response to a question or assertion, “is there any amount of evidence or rational argument that will cause you to change your mind?” If I get a “no” answer, I just observe that there is no need for further discussion. If I get a “yes” answer, I go ahead with the argument.
Usually I get no response. But I refuse to continue without an unambiguous “yes” committment to open-mindedness.
Some leftists insist on personalizing the discussion by (preemptively) attributing some negative emotion to you.
“Please don’t get upset/angry/annoyed, but ...”
“I understand that you’re upset/angry/annoyed about this ...”
“Perhaps you’re not ready to accept ...”
You may want to suggest they grab the bulky 3-ring binder they received at the DNC-sponsored seminar so as to not tax their brains too much. Tell them you’ll wait.
“• Will not answer your questions”
Will not answer my questions... ?