Kendrick Lamar teaches us that, in public debate, refuting your opponent's arguments point by point is less effective than identifying your opponent's single greatest weakness and maintaining message discipline.
Spending just 30 minutes in any politics chatroom shows you the same thing. Biden's debate prep team is clearly out of touch. With limited time, forget "good writing rules": ignore what you can't refute, toss in red herrings and straw men, then add some ad hominem attacks.
Yes, and play the message SIX TIMES at your live and streamed concert from one of the few remaining affluent Black zip codes in 🇺🇸 on JUNETEENTH. Can’t unhear it.
Lamar gave Drake ample warning of what he was going to get if he went after his family, and Drake, king of the glass house, bumbled into it face first.
Persuasive speech is this way in general. You could do a laundry list of reasons, but more effectively you should pick the one or two things that matter most to your core audience and develop that.
This is legitimately true. Watch a terf fall apart when you ignore every attempt they make at invalidating gender, and just focusing in on protecting women. "Oh, you're worried about women being harmed in prisons, so then, you support prison abolition, right?"
Not once did he find it necessary to natter on like a weenie about "kitchen table issues," either. He's probably doing well enough that he wouldn't be interested in working as a consultant, though. 😕