My point is that if you want to convince other people, you should try to argue from a place of intellectual honesty instead of gaslighting or willful blindness.

My point is that if you want to convince other people, you should try to argue from a place of intellectual honesty instead of gaslighting or willful blindness. Valid arguments could be made for “I don’t like what he is doing” or “he is dangerous” but just stating that he is not intelligent as the starting point for your argument doesn’t pass the smell test, so it clouds the rest of your argument. For me at least. It seems there are plenty of legitimate areas he is open for valid criticism. I know this will be downvoted, but I’m not discouraged by that outcome because it would only reinforce the point that a good faith discussion based on facts and logical persuasion is not welcome in this discussion.