manning5 Loc: Richmond, VA

You start by making a rather profound religious or political statement to a L*****t. The L*****t may well respond in one of these modes:

1. Agreement (But don't hold your breath!)

2. Flatout disagrees. (Rather likely!)

3. Ignores you. ( Possible)

4. Finds some insignificant textual, grammatical, or factual issue and blasts you for it. (Often used)

5. Changes the subject into his favorite idea set. (Often used)

6. Asks you for references, then critiques them as biased. (Sometimes used)

7. Starts denigrating you for being shallow, stupid, crazy or simply ignorant. (Very often used!)

8. Makes a counter argument that violates your principles.
(Often used!)

9. Uses a logical fallacy to rebut your statement that is hard to unravel in real time. (A bit more sophisticated)

10. Finds some loosely organized argument that expands the scope of the issue enormously to confuse you. (Often)

11. Uses some other tactic or phraseology designed to put you down, or prove you wrong from his point of view. (Possibly)

12. Combines two or more of the above. (Highly likely)

All of which leads to a non-debate on the original statement's merits and the L*****t stands there with a smirk on his face. (The late Alan Colmes was a master of numbers 9., 10., 11., and 12.)

Obviously, there are other people than L*****ts that use these kinds of debate or discussion tricks.

For certain there are other tactics L*****ts use, and it would be a service to sanity if they were also documented on OPP.

(When the L*****t initiates the debate and you make a counter response, you are mostly back at the start, and the nefarious tactics begin!)

bilordinary Loc: SW Washington

Some use masks and clubs!

Iliamna1

Alinski tactics for sure. . . obscure, obfuscate and lie. He was Hilarie's hero.

Fodaoson Loc: South Texas

Those 12 tactics are used by both sides on opp

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Agreed...

manning5 Loc: Richmond, VA

=========================

It is a question of degree. My perception and experience is that the Left uses these tactics far more than the Right does, including lying about Trump actions.

Dwight Logan

My editorial advice is to see if a l*****ts is telling the t***h use this litmus test. If there is no "not" in their statemen put on in to see the t***h. However remove one if there is one.

woodguru

First, here is the corroboration of what I've said for years...that the religiously oriented right treats politics just like they do their religious beliefs, they form their beliefs and no degree of t***h or facts will change those beliefs.

This list was a well written list of the tactics a believer uses when defending beliefs...

...the "l*****t" is debating facts as opposed to beliefs, and facts are always subject to being corrected, especially with an incoming array of constantly growing facts.

The right winger on the other hand, forms beliefs immediately upon a scandal breaking, these beliefs being formed along party line loyalties. They will immediately pronounce it as f**e news drummed up by a deep state and promoted by a corrupt and f**e news...of course Hannity and others at FOX will provide the rhetoric and talking points that will prevail even though new facts constantly emerge. No facts, no matter how well sourced or corroborated will detract from the original beliefs.

woodguru

These tactics are actually the tactics used when denying and obfuscating facts and reality by people who have already made up their minds.

The right doesn't want to admit t***hs because they will just be used against trump. We are living in a world where the right believes facts and the t***h will harm their leader...which of course they will.

Iliamna1

That has certainly been my experience. Knowing dates and tine-lines helps a lot. But for some, no answer will ever satiate their hatred of Trump (or those who v**ed for him).

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Believe it would depend on the situation....

Certainly at the moment we are seeing more of it from one side than the other...

Wonder if it would be different had Hillary won...

EmilyD

It would have been very different had Hillary won. Republicans don't behave the same way Democrats do. If they did, there would have been r**ting in the streets, weeping and "resistance" movements all over the country when Obama won. There was not....and that would not have happened if Hillary won, either.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Agreed..

But that doesn't address the topic of the thread....

EmilyD

So? I was responding to your comment: "Wonder if it would be different had Hillary won..."

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Which was in reference to the premise of the thread...

I doubt that the right would be above using these tactics had Hillary won...