Have you ever lost an argument with a liberal?

>>134855966
A liberal said hispanic was a race so I fucking called him a fucking kike then he cried then I went home and ate a sandwich with pride

>>134855966
never, not once. then again ive never argued with a liberal, i merely tell them facts and then laugh at them when they get mad because of their low intelligence and lack of sentience.

File: OBAMA LEAF pic.jpg (107KB, 800x601px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x601px

>>134855966
Every conservashit on /pol/ has

If a liberal turns to insults and name calling as a last ditch effort count as a loss for them? Because that happens a lot.

>>134856021
This.

No but actually they always want to "agree to disagree."

>>134856153
This too.

>>134856153
The sad part is that they think they won that argument when they start screaming like children.

File: simplyspiffing.png (532KB, 596x391px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 596x391px

>>134855966

>arguing with a liberal
>winning
>he calls out loudly to his friends to 'come and hear what this fascist is saying'
>they come over
>still winning
>ping pong argument between me and the four of them
>one of them actually says 'you're a fucking white male'

mfw

>>134856153
>>134856190

I'd say so.

>>134856153
if a liberal turns to insults just remind them that you would have no issue ending their lives if given the opportunity

File: arnold vosloo.jpg (29KB, 390x600px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 390x600px

Not really. I once had a debate with one of those "WE WUZ KANGZ" type of people, probably not a liberal, but he was a dumbass. He claim ancient Egyptian were black, and I was just so baffled how anybody could think that. I thought it was common knowledge that Egyptians and north-Africans in general were white-ish Arab looking people. I had do drop out from the argument because I didn't know how to deal with it.

No. In many regards both sides have similar goals, just different ideas how to achieve them that also lead to different consequences. First, we agree that there is a common denominator, e.g. "We both want what is best for x". I then point out what happens if it's done my way and what happens if it's done their way. If my way is objectively better or their way proves to be counterproductive and they still refuse to accept that I can point out that their intentions aren't genuine - because if they really cared about "what is best for x" they would agree with me - and if they don't, they are either ingenuine or have ulterior motives.

>>134855966
>Have you ever lost an argument with a liberal?
No because in my mind I'm always right and never lose

Yes I'm sure you leave your basements long enough to argue with random strangers about things they probably don't care about yet you worship kikes like Ben Shapiro and kike slave DJT.

>>134856516
I mean unless they could easily murder you with their bare hands since you're a complete omega wolf.

File: 1495752886721.png (583KB, 536x598px) Image search: [Google]

583KB, 536x598px

>>134857197

To lose an argument, you first need to have an argument.
Arguing with a liberal is not arguing, because they live in an alternate reality where they are always right and everyone who disagrees with them is a nazi, so in their mind they always win the arguments.

>>134855966
I've try arguing to one and he said
>it doesn't matter my anecdotal evidence is more real than facts.
>then this guy evade the question by saying X commit crime 100000000 years ago so they are worst than X

>>134855966
Not so much as lost, rather blocked.
>Me: You trust anything that comes out of the CIA at face value?
>Indoctrinated: You *don't* trust the CIA?
>Me: They're incredibly corrupt and their faulty information led us into a war. They have hundreds of thousands of $$ in deals with MSM outlets.
>Indoctrinated: Whoa, tinfoil hat alert! So you only trust Breitbart?
>Me: Stop putting words in my mouth, I'm skeptical of everything since every source has the potential of being corrupt, but there are degrees of corruption as in the DNC/FBI/Huffpo/etc
>Indoctrinated: What a loser! Keep supporting your racist, sexist, xenophobic president, Trumpster! *blocks*

>>134855966
Not even once. What's best is when you condition a girl to like getting abused and her letting you objectify her as you tell a leftist that equality is a false god.

>>134857006

so basically your all socialist over there

god, when is europe ever going to go full libertarian

>>134857699
Leftist cunts do like to block. It makes me smile that the leftist friends who I ran off have all since been proven wrong within the last year.

the times I have debated liberals it usually ends with them yelling that im wrong without giving a reason, or calling me white, this is more common with women I find

>>134857734
What did that have to do with socialism? I am very much anti-socialism as things are.

>>134855966
So unlike all the apparently infiniteley infallible and virile alpha male aryans who never lose an arguement in this thread I actually DID lose an arguement.
>argue against welfare state with libtarded aunt
>it creates dependant populations and cultural stagnation bit
>"your father is on welfare though"
>my dad actually is on welfare
>try to backpedal
>"in fact, multiple aspects of your life are only possible due to subsidies, which are just welfare programs for buisiness"
>rest of conversation is my shallow excuses whilst she twists the blade
>get BTFO by my aunt who makes me look like an ignorant hypocritical hillbilly

I was also 17 at the time and couldnt logic and reason my way out of a wet paper sack. But really fellas, none of us are perfect. Yall oughtta cut this "I NEVER LOSE" bullshit and spill the beans. We learn from our mistakes and have an opportunity to sharpen our debate skills by learning from others mistakes as well.

So cut the shit and share how you fucked up so that others may avoid the same pitfalls in the future.

>>134857734
*you're

>liberals can never effectively win a political argument because they get trapped by their own political correctness and end up contradicting themselves.

>>134856040
This.

>>134857992
When I was super young (15/16) I often made the mistake of projecting my moral values and logic (read: binge watching TAA and shit) when trying to deconstruct an Islamist's worldview.

Didn't work well, since time after time they kept defaulting back to "but muh Quran" or "but muh Quran, your Western values don't apply". After like a year I began to wrap my head around the idea that ideologues can only be defeated from within the prism of their own logic/morals.

For SJWs, that usually means making an emotional appeal and insist that being the better person further helps their goal of portraying anti-SJWs as the racists they are. (Often the few SJWs that try to be better people either became SJWs-in name only or shed that ideology all together.)

Arguing against the barbarity of Islam is usually dependent on the Muslim's understanding of Islam, their faction, and their pride. Usually pointing out logical contradictions or the fact that it's [Current Year] instead of 1400, when they reluctantly defend apostasy laws and other draconian veil/hijab/niqab-shit.

I don't argue with Christians any more, they're not worth dismantling. They have too many sides attacking them already.

>>134856324
"Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pidgeon; they shit all over the board and then strut about as if they've won."

It's impossible to lose against a liberal

>>134857043
That's mah boy !

>>134857006
you dont want the same things
"we both want what is best for x"
for you its germans, and europe
for them it's non germans and the world

>>134855966
>arguing with deluded people
I stopped arguing a long time ago, I just explain my views, enjoy their shocked reactions and keep explaining as the questions roll in. Trying to change someone's mind like you've got a chance is moronic.

File: 1500335417201.gif (2MB, 288x288px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 288x288px

I think I've technically lost one argument with my grandmother when I was 17 about welfare, mostly because I lacked real knowledge on the subject at the time.. But people around my my age? Not even once. Lost against libertarians once or twice on grounds that I didn't know as much as I should have about my own chosen ideology and there were questions I simply could not answer. Arguing with libertarians is actually enjoyable however, whereas arguing with anyone left of center usually leads to my palm embracing my face and me talking to them really slowly because I'm never sure if the are stupid or just ill-informed.

>>134855966
No, because the only illiberal positions I take are on race and sex, and that shit is measurable. I'm not a free marketeer or a gun nut.

>>134856021
Pretty much this

File: 1483379791802s.jpg (3KB, 125x83px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x83px

>>134855966
no never, matter of fact i turned some of them into my flag related by intensive, deep, calm and civilized discussion

File: mexiusa.png (34KB, 691x231px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 691x231px

I try to stay away from arguing with muh 420 genders liberals that you're talking about. They're ideologues that simply won't listen to a conflicting idea no matter what. It'd be like trying to convince a devout christian that God isn't real.

But sure, I have lost a few arguments with some sane liberals. They called me out on my bullshit and I'm thankful for it.