I notice a strong proclivity, in keeping with your item 1, to avoid the issue by changing the subject to something about me, personally. This can be done overtly or in all kinds of stealthy ways. But changing the subject to me, personally, is changing the subject to me personally and any effort I make to counter that tactic is invariably used against me.

The tactic is highly dysfunctional, of course. I mean what is the point of trying to convince me that I am somehow defective? The tactic is pure malice, which brings me to my second comment: all efforts to counter these tactics by people whom you identify as "ideologues" lead them to project. Whatever it is that is driving them to engage in these silly tactics, they invariably try to accuse me of. And too they engage in gaslighting. If I identify the tactics they try to convince me that their dysfunction I am told I did it first and it's my own fault.

I even have one of them making anti-Semitic comments to me and trying to tell me it's my fault.

I think perhaps you're giving them too much credit by calling them "ideologues."

There was a time, when you couldn't get away with most of that here. If you didn't have a link to good facts, you were slapped down.

Now, most of those things are common in many threads here.

to make their points? Frankly, I think they should get banned if (and when) they keep on trashing our DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE.