porky pie: (Cockney rhyming slang, chiefly in the plural) A lie (false statement).
porky pie - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
tales not tails. And I wasn’t suggesting adopting that , just using it as an example. Liar works for me.
Shutting down an actual argument, no. But someone who’s not interested in legitimate argument, who just wants to piss you off by jerking your chain? That person deserves to be shut down, and if I read the OP correctly, that’s what’s being requested.
“Do not feed the troll.”
Insult them directly, then. Start with “That is a lie, and that makes you a liar because you have been told the truth and ignored it” and immediately put them on the defensive. They are depending on you to try to be reasonable and listen to their side-do NOT give in to this.
Cervaise: That person deserves to be shut down, and if I read the OP correctly, that’s what’s being requested.
Yes. That.
“We’ll have to agree to differ then. Goodbye.”
Trying to produce a ‘good comeback’ means you have already been sucked in to the ‘debate’.
This may be asking too much of a word…but a lot of times the discourse isn’t going to get anywhere because the other side’s exposure is nothing but Fox and other Right-of-center news sources. At which point my only hope is that eventually the pain lands and they see they may have been fed a lie by a conman and his crew.
That works only if they get to keep all the pain for themselves…which is almost never.
This is my go to. I don’t care if they are lying or misinformed at some point, and i see no value in randomly insulting people.
It must have value, because it is working for them all the time. “Agree to disagree” is no better than calling a tie and walking away…leaving the podium and the microphone to them.
Eh, calling them a liar just makes you look unpleasant, and doesn’t advance your position.
There’s also “you do you", which often works for this type of thing.
But the OP, and frankly one hell of a lot of lefties including me, aren’t interested in a debate, a podium, or a microphone. The only message to pass is “I ain’t debating in the mud with a pig. ‘cuz they like it. And you’re a willfully ignorant pig.”
IMO the correct message is utter contempt for their so-called facts and their so-called logic and their so-called sources and their so-called conclusions.
Contempt is probably the only idea simple enough they can comprehend. So contempt is what they will get. Followed by my walking away. I don’t care if they’re left sputtering in perceived defeat or giggling in perceived victory. I only care that I don’t have to listen to a god-damned thing that dribbles outta their face.
They already see the left as evil subhumans intent on bringing the country down. Getting on their “good side” is a loser’s game, but I’m sure they appreciate the effort because it makes their job so much easier.
They cheat and they lie.
I’m not trying to “get on their good side" when i say either, "we’ll have to agree to disagree” or " your do you”. I’m trying to disengage with an argument that isn’t going to go anywhere.
The argument usually isn’t very private, so there are three parties involved-you, your opposition, and the public. When you walk away, that just leaves two. The opposition then has the opportunity to give both sides, theirs, and their version of yours.
So there @Czarcasm what is your solution to out-shouting (or shutting down) Faux, QAnon, and all the rest of the MAGAsphere propaganda machine? Because that is what it will take to alter the course of politics in this country.
I never said shout…but you should be direct, and you should never walk away with a “moral” victory that only makes you feel better. Lies should be called as soon as they happen, which doesn’t happen normally in a weird desire to “hear the other side”.
But do you really think there could conceivably be a riposte so devatasting that it would leave them gasping like a gaffed fish? They’re not listening anyway. Why waste your time…?
Our neighborhood has monthly gatherings for games. There’s ‘that one guy’ and I don’t mind sparring with him, but over the course of the last three gatherings or so, I’ve noticed that the ‘third member of the debate’ is getting really upset about the whole thing. And I realize that the best course of action is to not engage, because they’re just as likely to be upset with me as him. It’s best for everyone involved to not talk politics. (I think there’s an etiquette rule about that somewhere…)
The part that disgusts me is the news coverage, where the DOJ says something and you wonder if they -know- they’re lying to the base, or if they’re really that deluded? And it’s every time I see them on a TV with the volume up. It’s a constant saturation of gaslighting and lies.