In advancing your political views, there is a tactical difference between advancing “ideas” and “rhetoric”.
An “idea” is a concept, which might be true or false, and may have a certain amount of merit. Or not.
“Rhetoric” is language sometimes used in argument to advance one’s idea.
The liberals confuse the two. In many, many cases they have poor or invalid ideas, but they are able to employ superior rhetoric. (This is particularly true in the case of certain lawyers!) I would call such an effort as “deceptive rhetoric” (for lack of a better term). The confusion of the liberal is that they think that if their rhetoric is superior, that makes them right. It is the verbal version of “might makes right.”
For example, the false “labor theory of value” which is the main philosophical point underlying socialism is blatantly false. It is false because human nature does not associate the value of a good or service based upon the effort that it took to create. Rather human nature allows each individual to determine for herself the value of a good or service, in their sole discretion. The labor theory of value thus is simply a theory, which in our world has no basis in reality, and is thus easily falsified.
But liberals (and lawyers) use rhetorical skills to come up with arguments to sling at their opponents. As in the case of the labor theory of value, an example would “tax cuts for the wealthy”, which is a sound bite that packs rhetorical wallop, while being empty of substance. While their idea is a loser, they can influence the clueless with their deceptive rhetoric.