Conservatives arguing techniques 101

[WileEcoyote]

Go to a political forum with differing political party voices.

OK now present a good argument and watch as the Conservatives resort to obfuscation, putting words in your mouth, twisting your words, attacking the character of your source (or you), replying with bald faced lies, expending four pages of bandwidth with baseless long worded beige arguments that make no sense at all, using Multiple/Unanswered/Post/Syndrome (aka: MUPS)

or when all else fails:

Just placing you "on ignore" altogether.

In fact it is also useful to watch for those who employ these tactics on NON political forums. Humorous, because these will tend to be Conservatives as well.

Seriously! Go to a NON political forum, state an opinion. Say something, anything for that matter but watch for the responses: If they attack your credibility without regard for your source or even just common sense? Well just for fun check and see what their political affiliation is.

9 out of 10 times he will be a Conservative.

This is true for discussions ranging from anything like anatomy to yodeling. Couldn't find a topic starting with a "Z"...

"Obfuscation, putting words in your mouth, twisting your words", is the Rovian/Limbaugh way. Closely related to "bald faced lies"


One more recent tactic is the old "You're making personal attacks" response when in fact the Con has just got himself impaled on his own indisputable LYING statement. Kind of like what a poor Conservative friend of mine went through after trying to explain a six second 47 story free fall drop of a steel framed building that was previously unhurt structurally.

Before I cleaned another Con's clock (figuratively speaking) he used to regularly dump pages of B/S "articles" that had little to no bearing on the argument at hand. Stuff that would take years to evaluate and that was originally wrote only so as to give the Cons cover. Something to "debate" with to make them look smart.

For more on this matter review Abbey's classic quote:

“When the philosopher's argument becomes tedious, complicated, and opaque, it is usually a sign that he is attempting to prove as true to the intellect what is plainly false to common sense”


The "White Trash" Con is a lot less nuanced with his replies. He just calls the Libs "Stupid", then takes his marbles and goes home.

MUPS is common among those insecure about their egos.

It's all bullschidt and absolutely predictable. Every time!

The thing is, why do these people insist on going through such pains to "prove" their whacky world view? With less than half that effort they could actually be out there DOING something rational that could significantly help the planet. Lord knows they surely have enough of our money.

It's like the oil companies: If they stopped bitching about Global Warming matters and followed China's example (f'ing miserable CHINA is ahead of all of us!!!) on alternative energy? Well they'd be miles ahead of the competition and with a secure future for everyone.

[Make7]

1. This is the last straw - you're going on my ignore list. ( n/t )

:sarcasm:

[WileEcoyote]

2. He he hee

Exactly!

I forgot about that one. Draws attention to himself by acting offended.

They like to conspire against me on other forums. Trying to line up the Cons and moderates to "ignore". Hysterical.

[Joe the Liberal]

3. Lol too true.....

I've seen it over and over again, they do everything you stated and I always wonder why they take so much time and effort to argue online with some stranger, what do they have to gain? It's as though they are so petty and shallow that "winning" an argument online is a big "accomplishment" to them.

[zbdent]

4. make a point with a slight exaggeration, and you are

accused of engaging in hyperbole and that your candidate will have every mother to be abort their babies in the re-education gulags in Siberia ...

[WileEcoyote]

5. Gonna use that one