XD I mena people who BELEIVE his statements think they do "oh, he is right because he doesnt change hsi stance and owns everyone" but he's not a debater, he doesn't make actual points to move you to his hide, instead he does something even more Vile. Sorry if my answer is long
imagine you think the sky is green, all you need to do is repeat its green and make sure any comment made against you is wrong, no matter who says it. make sure any NEW comment someone made, even if its in favour if you, is also wrong. lecture people. because you don't actually
KNOW of UNDERSTAND the viewpoint that you have, you just repeat it. you don't come with new insights, you dont listen to the science of it all, or talk to experts. what you do is memorize everything thats in your favour, which is not a lot, and have counterpoints, even if they're wrong, on
the subjects that counter said points. "the sky is not green, because Blue is not a naturally occuring colour in nature. it is manmade, always is. the sweets that you eat. the drinks that you drink. no. it cannot be blue" because he knows the sky IS blue, so he nees counters against it
doesn't always mean that these counters actually disprove the coutnerpoint, they just have to make the peopel who beleive him feel like they're right "green is the colour of nature, its the perfect colour, yet you come with the colour blue without any facts or reason"
seriosuly, there are videos and essays out there where people argued with SERIOUS people, winning arguments, and said argument was "does brown milk come from brown cows" and just using this, you THINK you win, if you already believe in it.
no, he was a terrible debater, what he was smart in was getting people on his side. poeple who previously did not believe it. and that needs a more complex explanation