This is The Guide To Dirty Debate Tactics.
So, check out this article I just saw.
American newspapers resoundingly reject Donald Trump.
Sounds like they're talking about most American newspapers, right?
So, I looked into this further and then it turns out that we were talking about 72 newspapers
that had rejected trump.
Now, 72 must be close to the number of total newspapers in the US, right?
So, I looked it up.
In 2014, there were 1,331 newspapers in the US.
So, 72 out of 1,331?
I'm not a math wizard, but that's only about 5% of all the newspapers in the US.
I'm not clear about what the other 95% of newspapers think.
Now, I'm no Donald Trump fan, but you just saw and example of a dirty debate tactic called
"cherrypicking".
Hey, its Min from The Art of Verbal War, where people learn to excel in verbal skills and
today's video is called The Guide To Dirty Debate Tactics.
Now, my point here is not to endorse Donald Trump.
Both sides are looking pretty damn unappealing aren't they?
I'm here today because I want to talk about the subject of dirty debate tactics that people
use to debate in general, but since its election season, I'm going to use the 2016 elections
to talk about it.
Some people call these dirty debate tactics "logical fallacies".
Now logical fallacies, that term is just a little too fancy pansy for me.
So I prefer to just call them "dirty tricks".
Dirty tricks played by both sides in arguing for their candidate or against the other candidate.
If you want to become a good debater or debate politics, and its debatable whether debating
politics is ever a good idea, then you need to learn these dirty tricks.
Why?
So, you can use them of course.
Okay I'm just kidding.
Mostly, you just need to learn these dirty tricks so you don't get fooled by them.
So, here are five more dirty debate tactics that you must know.
#1 is what I call "sneaky" ad hominem attacks.
We all know that ad hominem attacks are part and parcel of debates about political candidates.
You should always expect others to attack mostly irrelevant things about their personality
or person, such as Trump's hair or that time Hillary fainted.
You should always be on the lookout for these types of attacks because they're irrelevant.
However, what I mean by "sneaky" ad hominem attacks is something a little bit different.
What I mean is an attack on you personally, usually when you bring up a good point.
Here's an example: "I can't believe you support that issue (or candidate)".
Or, "I just lost some respect for you when you said that".
Remember this: shaming you is not a legitimate debate tactic.
The second dirty debate tactic is the use of double standards or shifting standards.
What I mean by double standards or shifting standards is that negative facts are only
negative when they're about the other side.
Whenever negative facts relate to your opponent's side, you'll find that the standard (and one
that was artificially high for your candidate) suddenly disappears or the standards that
get applied to their preferred candidate, get shifted or changed and always to a lower
standard.
The third dirty debate tactic is the use of ambiguous or vague sources, evidence, or facts.
Your opponents will use all sorts of anonymous sources or use sources that QUOTE anonymous
sources in an attempt to make their point.
Don't trust anonymous sources.
If you can't verify who said something, then it might as well have never been said.
And often, its made up.
Or, they'll use ambiguous sources.
For example "Media outlets have looked into this and debunked it" or "All the experts
agree".
Now, which media outlets or experts are they talking about?
And, what biases do these media outlets or experts have?
And sometimes, and this is really important, even sources, evidence, and facts are misrepresented
to prove a point.
Don't just think about what they're telling you.
Make sure you consider what they're NOT telling you.
The fourth dirty debate tactic is what I call "knowledge".
Often, you'll find people stating their beliefs and characterizing them as fact.
Your opponents BELIEF is not a fact.
What they "think" is also not a fact.
A sneaky way people use this technique is to say something like this: "I can't imagine
Hillary doing that".
What your opponent IMAGINES is also not a fact, especially what someone imagines about
someone else's intent.
This type of "knowledge" is not actual knowledge.
They aren't facts, they aren't real, and you should never be fooled by it.
The fifth dirty debate tactic is the use of irrelevant analogies and metaphors.
As I've talked about, using analogies and metaphors is an incredibly powerful persuasion
tool, so on the flip side, its very easy to get sucked in and be defeated by an analogy
or metaphor, so they will seek to use them against you in the hopes you won't realize
it or you won't know how to defeat it.
However, just realize that an analogy or metaphor, no matter how good it sounds, might not actually
apply to the real, literal issue at hand, so make sure you keep a keen eye on this tactic
and DIFFERENTIATE analogies and metaphors from the issue at hand when they aren't relevant.
So, there you go.
I gave you six of the most common dirty debate tactics that people use in political debates
or discussions.
If you want to learn more about the dirty tricks that people use in arguments or debates
generally, and not just in political debates, but ANY type of debate, check out my book
"The New Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument in Today's World".
Inside, you'll learn 38 of the most common and time-tested ways people use to win debates
and arguments.
Don't ever be fooled again.
To get a free preview, go to www.artofverbalwar.com/aobrbonus.
Okay that's it for today.
Until next time, keep being excellent and hey, please subscribe to this YouTube channel.