You probe the man for his fears, and manipulate him into channeling that fear in a way that is to society's benefit instead of its detriment. It's a multi-conversation process where you plant psychological seeds and harvest them later. Patience is key, since this can't be done in a single conversation. You have to get the moron to think he came up with the ideas you're suggesting to him on his own. Books on persuasion are worth reading in this regard. Caldini is the best place to start. In my opinion, his book Pre-Suasion is more valuable than his first book Influence, but they are both very useful.
I think Greg's observation (which he isn't articulating very well) is that conservatives and evidence-minded people tend to be bad at rhetoric and subtle forms of influence. I believe it stems from our disgust at others people's attempt to manipulate us into self-destructive behavior and a sane desire to just want to be left the fuck alone. It's kinda like being shot at all the time, getting annoyed by it, and refusing to shoot back because you've associated the gun with the guy shooting you. Rhetoric and psychological manipulation are tools that have been effectively used against our interests for decades, and we need to start playing the same game. Yes, they have the megaphone, but we are better and smarter than they are, and I believe we can win if enough of us make the transition from a defensive to offensive mindset.
-----
Here's something I
archived from the Twatter ghetto. If this person is for real, I hope her son has a violent psychotic episode while she's the only one in the room.